MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2766634783 · doi:10.1353/com.2017.0027

The Slow Professor: Challenging the Culture of Speed in the Academy by Maggie Berg and Barbara K. Seeber

2017· article· en· W2766634783 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff

Notice bibliographique

Revue˜The œComparatist/Comparatist · 2017
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineArts and Humanities
ThématiqueHistory of Science and Medicine
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésCorporatizationSociologyResistance (ecology)PleasureHumanismHappinessSincerityMedia studiesPsychologyLawPolitical science

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Reviewed by: The Slow Professor: Challenging the Culture of Speed in the Academy by Maggie Berg and Barbara K. Seeber Jeffrey R. Di Leo Maggie Berg and Barbara K. Seeber, The Slow Professor: Challenging the Culture of Speed in the Academy Toronto/Buffalo/London: University of Toronto Press, 2016. x + 115 pp. "We are Slow Professors," announce the co-authors of this book (ix). "We believe that adopting the principles of Slow into our professional practice is an effective way to alleviate work stress, preserve humanistic education, and resist the corporate university" (ix). "Corporatization," they continue, "has compromised academic life and sped up the clock" (x). The Slow Professor is a practical book aimed at convincing us to slow down all aspects of our academic lives as both an act of resistance to the corporatization of higher education as well as an endeavor to bring more pleasure and happiness into our academic lives. The co-authors of this manifesto, two Canadian professors of English, give a heartfelt defense for slowing down academic life. While in the hands of other authors, this project might have come off as a shameless attempt to get academic attention by defending a controversial thesis ("Professors need to slow down!") and fashionable topic (there is a "slow" book out now for just about everything including most recently, philosophy [Michelle Boulous Walker, Slow Philosophy: Reading Against the Institution (Bloomsbury, 2017)]), Maggie Berg of Queen's University and Barbara K. Seeber of Brock University manage to avoid this primarily because of the sincerity of their commitment to "slowness." Telephone conversations about coping with life in the corporate academy between Berg and Seeber led them to envision writing, in part, "a self-help book for academics" that would be "structured for reader ease" (13). Drawing on a wide range of sources advocating slowness such as the "Slow Food movement" (34) with its "focus on local artisans" (51) to "defend the … pleasures of food under threat from standardization and fast food" (Geoff Andrews, The Slow Food Story: Politics and Pleasure [Montreal and Kingston: McGill-Queen's University Press, 2008], 17–18), and Carl Honoré's In Praise of Slow: How a Worldwide Movement Is Challenging the Cult of Speed (Toronto: Vintage, 2004), Berg and Seeber make a compelling case for slowing down the increasing speed of academic life. But for those among us who are not and will never become "slow" professors, this book will be a bit difficult to digest, especially the first chapter. Entitled, "Time Management and Timelessness," it surveys a number of ways to save time in pursuance of our academic life only to throw them out the window because of their similarity to the aims of the corporate university. As someone who has utilized a number of these methods of increasing productivity and efficiency, as well as others not only as a professional academic but also as a student from high school through graduate school, it is hard to agree with their suggestion that we should do [End Page 377] away with them—and adopt instead "a counterculture, a Slow culture that values balance and that dares to be skeptical of the professions of productivity" (21). Here's an example: Donald E. Hall has argued that we need to "set … realistic daily and weekly goals," and suggests that we need to save Saturday's for research and twelve hours on Sunday for grading and class preparation (20). Hall's suggestions are provided as a way of increasing our research productivity even if we have high teaching loads like 4/4 or above. While I'm not a big proponent of Sunday preparation and grading, I don't see anything wrong with doing reading, writing, and research on the weekends, especially if this is something one enjoys doing. Also, setting not only "realistic daily and weekly goals," but also monthly and yearly goals seems to me to be a good healthy habit. For me, the habit of goal setting did not come from reading one of Donald E. Hall's articles on how to make oneself a more productive academic, rather it came out of educational practices that started in secondary school. Teachers in grade school and...

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesÉtudes des sciences et des technologies
Catégories consensuellesÉtudes des sciences et des technologies
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,468
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,999

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0050,004
Communication savante0,0010,000
Science ouverte0,0020,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,063
Tête enseignante GPT0,310
Écart entre enseignants0,246 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; les deux têtes enseignantes s’accordent sur ce qui est montré ici.

Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2017
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revue˜The œComparatist/ComparatistMême sujetHistory of Science and MedicineTravaux en français237 207