Sara photocopied this article for me on teacher’s identification for GTAs. Freyberg and Ponarin contend that teacherly identification is formed through resocialization, which “tries to ‘make up for or correct some deficiency in earlier socialization'” (140, quoting Stanton Wheeler), rather than socialization. Freyberg and Ponarin “propose that both the structural incentives and the professional culture in graduate programs tend to affect TAs’ self-esteem and professional identification in such a way as to discourage identification with teaching in favor of identification with the research role” (141). Students feel alienation, feel forced to choose between teaching and researching (and often choose researching because of the disciplining and rewarding of research [you get your degree through research], and do not feel like “whole people” (142). Through graduate programs, GTAs’ identities shift from “student” to “professional scholar,” rather than to “teacher,” even if the GTA has a commitment to teaching (144).
The researchers focused on sociology PhD students, and I wonder how this is different for English graduate students. Particularly, we might consider how this is different even within English departments: are rhetoric and writing students more likely to identify as teachers, to link their research to their teacherly selfs, whereas literature students are more likely to identify as researchers first? Is there more support for GTAs in English departments, the department on campus that is probably most likely to support teaching and pedagogy? Freyberg and Ponarin stress that we need to support the “whole person” graduate student, not just the scholar. Are English departments better ar this than others? I think it is problematic in English departments (we are, in fact, told to be “good teachers” and “great researchers,” not “great teachers”).
Related to the research Sara and I are doing: how do GTAs express their frustration (low self-esteem and self-doubt) online, and how do they express the disjunction between researching and teaching online?
Freyberg, Mark, and Ed Ponarin. “Resocializing Teachers: Effects of Graduate Programs on Teaching Assistants.” Teaching Sociology 21.2 (April 1993): 140-147.
One point that was not addressed explicitly was whether the GTA’s in the article are MA or PHD (which I think). I think this makes a difference, though I have not yet thought about what difference.
Another significant difference is whether the GTA is older than average – as I was – and already had some teaching experience and/or opportunities to self-identify with a vocation/avocation.
Further, and significant for our work, is the fact that there is usually a fairly constant demand for teachers of composition, compared to the ever tightening market for lit professors, and the apparently widening market for creative writers who sell freelance as well as teach.
And – something we haven’t even mentioned – is distance learning – online classes and how a teacher presents an identity entirely online. One thing we could be doing – and I do have a number of examples, mostly on my work computer – is looking at the everyday emails that TA’s send to their students via Blackboard.
Today several announced adjustments due to the weather, and the language used certainly conveys a personality, an authority, etc.
Are you more drawn to looking at text? I am eager to put my document analysis practice from WR 214 and WR 327 to bear on imagistic pages.
Also, implied in my previous was the thought of how many sociology GTA’s/PhD’s can expect to get hired and where and what are the qualities sought? I would argue that their publications (i.e. their research) are a key factor in job applications.
Compare that to composition instructors – “overworked and underpaid” and a majority female perhaps , certainly at Community Colleges I think – for whom publication/research is of little importance to their being hired to teach comp.