|
Outsider in the Promised
Land: Acquiring the Culture of Academe
The promised land (in this paper Academia) - an unattainable, golden dream representing freedom, opportunity, and choice. It has an elusive quality - but it is something worked for, fought for, and something to be reached. Within this place many fantasies of future achievement occur. Upon attaining access to the golden (although tarnished) land, those euphoric dreams, many have discovered the contradictive nature of dream and reality. It is in this limbo, that new faculty members are trapped until they acquire the culture of academe.
Acquiring the culture of academe can be difficult. If you are a female it can even be more difficult. As evidenced in this excerpt there are male models with which to contend, which represent what is acceptable within the institution. In addition, there are historical traditions of the hallowed halls:
which makes the culture of academe difficult to transcend, particularly if one happens to be an outsider - female. Women's experiences. The experience of women who are educators. The stories of women concerned about their profession while searching for their place within it. This is a rich way to explore the texture of teaching while exploring the process of cultural acquisition. The women described within this paper did not set themselves up as models, we set ourselves up as friends and colleagues who could learn from each other and about ourselves. To depict the individualized, yet shared nature of this acquisition I examined the letters of and conversations with three colleagues from research institutions over a year's time. Within the pages of our journaled letters, there are fascinating data about academia and relationships. Each had a different perspective, each brought a different, yet eerily similar, heart to their writing. What we created was a critical quadralogue about the acquisition of life as an academician. What we developed in the process was an understanding of our own teaching and a way of seeing our experience that we could translate into a language for working with our students. This is not a sad story of four women's experiences, nor an indictment of any institution or appropriate members most of whom I know had best intentions. Rather, it is the revelation of four women's adventures into academe. Clearly because this study examines four lives, generalizations can not be made. Yet, in light of available research, and its supporting evidence, that is easy to forget. There are three areas to explore as I examine the data. First, I look at culture and the issues involved in its acquisition. In this paper I explore the culture of academe but I do not make claims toward the examination of culture. Once I explore the acquisition of a culture and the relevance of cultural models, the next step I take is to look at higher education and some of the cultural aspects attributed to it. A third aspect important to this paper is gender. While I will not examine all gender issues related to society, I will look at gender issues relevant to our experience - the male- dominated world of academe can not help but affect the experience of new women faculty members (Tannen, 1990; Gilligan, 1983). ACQUISITION OF CULTURE Culture can be defined as "those collective interpretations of social and material experience that are more or less shared by members. of a group and available to be acquired by individuals who interact in the group" (Eisenhart, 1990, p. 22). An examination of culture exemplifies an effort to understand the various ways people construct their lives as they live them (Geertz, 1983, p. 16). Culture structures general guidelines by which people ought to live which, in turn, affect individuals' behaviors, their approaches to education, their interactions with kin and friends. Yet culture does not affect us all in the same way; men and women are exposed differently to culture and the social structure (Epstein, 1988). Eisenhart (1990) defines the acquisition of culture as the process by which people as individuals come to understand meaning (Heath, 1983) from culture and make it their own. This process occurs in stages of increasing personal expertise and identification (Eisenhart, 1990; Holland ) with a distinct cultural system.Individual advancement through the stages can be limited by social relationships, have positive and negative implications, and be developmentally uneven. Although there is evidence of an individual's process of abstracting meaning from their surroundings and making it a part of themselves, frameworks for understandingarelimited (Eisenhart,1990). Significantly, in this study we are not acquiring culture for the first time. The process of learning is not as obvious, nor are we acquiring a totally new culture, but we are confronting the possibility of finding a niche for ourselves within new social groups. In these circumstances there is the possibility that these groups would use or produce ideas or artifacts that differed to some degree from what we had previously known. Holland (adapting Dreyfus, cited in Eisenhart, 1990) attributes stages to the acquisition process -novice, advanced beginner, competent, proficient, and expert. Of course, in this study, we are only in the novice and/or advanced beginner stages. These stages are differentiated by the responses to rules (information and knowledge) in given situation and by the individual's investment in a successful outcome. According to Eisenhart the novices' and beginners' actions are "hesitant, often not-quite-right, and relatively unconcerned, as they try to learn all the rules and come to recognize some of their situational limitations". To reach beyond the beginner stages a person must begin to identify themselves as a member of the world of which they want to be a part. Cultural Models The acquisition of a culture also involves coming to terms with one's cultural models. This is a way to examine the influence of cultural knowledge of people's experience. A cultural model, a taken-for-granted model of the world that is shared by members of society, sometimes serves "to
The process of identifying a cultural model involves determining fundamental versus surface elements of the complex of beliefs and knowledge (Holland and Skinner, 1987). Foster's (1966) study of the peasant society in Tzintzuntzan provides an example of a cultural model. He found that the Tzintzuntzan peasants believed in the image of limited good and guided their lives by that principle although they never communicated it or identified it as part of the way they viewed the world. According to Foster (1966), the peasants believed that there was nothing in a peasants' power to increase the available resources and everyone could only have just so much. This cultural model was an unconscious orientation, yet it guided peasant behavior. When examining the data one possible model emerged above others. This model suggests a taken-for-granted world where education transforms the student and the teacher and those involved act out that transformation. In this model those involved are equal partners engaged in the exploration of learning. Each exchange ideas with the other. The model also implies reasons for the transformation. Additionally the model furnishes a way to evaluate the transformation and a choice for measuring success. This model of transformation is essentially an interpretive structure, a meaning system, not a set of prescriptive rules. HIGHER EDUCATION This cultural model found among all of us to varying degrees conflicted with the culture we were attempting to acquire. To understand that, we must first understand the culture involved. The culture of academe appears to have organizational structures and processes that must be followed. Key elements are: autonomy, seeking external financial support, isolation, lack of emotional support, and survival which are reinforced with certain structures, behaviors, procedures, communication practices, norms or values, and. expectations of others. As we became familiar with our academic surroundings we endeavored to succeed and establish professional identities in varying degrees within our complex settings. Professors entering the profession face two major tasks - to do the job they have been hired to do; to learn to do the job. Coming to understand the culture is a problem. Kuh and Whitt (1988) describing universities as social communities suggest that to better understand the thought and behavior of academics, we must understand their culture. The new faculty member identity process may cause difficulty. Values may be misunderstood.The newcomers must learn how to read and respond to the system values. The history of an institution and how its culture developed, represent information available only to those who have been there. Cultural perspectives validate aspects of university life. Kuh and Whitt (1988) define it as "the collective, mutually shaping patterns of norms, values, practices, beliefs, and assumptions that guide the behaviors of individuals and groups in an institution of higher education and provide a frame of reference within which to interpret the meaning of events and actions on and off campus" (pp. 12-13). Each institution's culture varies. The essential but often tacit assumptions that undergird the thoughts, behavior, and representations are the core of the culture. Specific, exact definitions remain elusive. New faculty members must learn student, institutional, and collegial expectations, learn the functions of the university, and decipher the history and traditions of their new institution (Baldwin, 1979; Mathis, 1979). They must also gain familiarity with their new roles as faculty members - including teaching, research, and service (Bess, 1978). SOCIALIZATION RESEARCH A number of higher education researchers have focused on the socialization process of new faculty members at research institutions. Their findings reveal the stress of competitive personal and professional demands, the expectations on performance in a competitive environment, the disappointment in failed collaboration (Whitt, 1991), and the positive challenge offered by their teaching and research (Whitt, 1991; Reynolds, 1988) as important concerns. In one study of School of Education new faculty members, Whitt (1991) found "having to be responsible for their own socialization may have added to the already heavy workload of new faculty. Having to spend time 'spinning their wheels' finding out answers to questions - or finding out questions exacerbated the sense of carrying a 'a load of bricks"' (p. 193). Various studies of new faculty members suggest a comradery of experience (Mager and Meyers, 1982; Reynolds, 1988; Whitt, 1991, for example). Their concerns comprise feelings of isolation, competition, departmental politics, uncomfortable interactions, ambiguous measures of success, time pressures, lack of time for research, and tenure fears. These issues are often not addressed. WOMEN Women's conformity to academia is precarious. Generally their ways of understanding are distinctive and dissimilar from the traditional perspective. Often their goal is to enter as well as change the nature of the work (Aisenberg and Harrington, 1988, p. 19). In a study of women academics, Aisenberg and Harrington (1988) suggest that women have a serious commitment to the idea of change. They also found that women believed academics advanced through merit and did not need to advertise their abilities and talents; they often refused to play the game. Moreover, they were shocked when merit acknowledgement did not happen. For women, the dichotomy between the merit process and their desire for an empowered identity is profound. They find politics in academe to be repugnant. Instead, women choose arenas for direct, accessible changes to the larger society and resist work that focuses on relationship of actual daily experience to larger social and moral pattern (Aisenberg and Harrison, 1988, p. 94). The college system is impersonal (Belenky, Clinchy, Goldberger, and Tarule,1986). Women's ways of thinking about education, about life, about change are quite different. They seek connection, they pursue growth. Education is one field where women can soar, but their approach is often distinct. They seek to "assist students in birthing their own ideas", to 44 support students' thinking", to "encourage students to speak in their own active voice", to be a 'midwife' (Belenky et al., 1986). METHODOLOGY Reality is socially constructed (Berger and Luckman, 1966). Individuals and their beliefs are affected by their experiences and the contexts within which they operate. They are also affected by interactions with members of the group with which they associate. To best understand cultural acquisition this study necessarily uses a qualitative approach. This research emphasizes the importance of meaning and process to the understanding of human action (Bogdan and Biklen, 1982). Qualitative research involves theory construction from data gathered in a particular setting which provide a rich description (Geertz, 1973). Its "framework emerges empirically from the field in the course of the study; the most important research questions will become clear only later on..." (Miles and Huberman 1984, p. 27). One of the most salient characteristics of qualitative research is the use of the researcher as the research tool. This study represents the epitome of that aspect. We represented both the subject and the researcher. While most qualitative researchers must be careful because they don't "think like subjects" (Bogdan and Biklen, 1982, p. 119), we were the subjects, we were our subjects. This raised its own set of concerns. Usually since all data are filtered directly through the eyes of the datacollector, they adopt a "disciplined subjectivity" (Erickson, 1973) which requires self-conscious and rigorous examination for bias along each step of the research process. In our situation, though, we did not fear detachment nor did we structure the direction of the writings, we wrote our experiences and commented on letters received. To triangulate our observations we also sought dialogue with other colleagues to affirm/disconfirm our perspectives (Borman, LeCompte, and Goetz, 1986). While flexibility in qualitative research is essential (Patton, 1980; Stainback and Stainback, 1984; Taylor and Bogdan, 1984) and it is important that the researcher not become totally engulfed by the experience, our circumstances were unique. We did not fear "going native", we were the natives. In qualitative research there is no clear collection and analysis (Hammersley and Atkinson, 1983), which involves a reflective process (Glaser and Strauss, 1965) and is more sensitive to to an adaptable to many influences and patterns that are encountered (Lincoln and Guba, 1985). As Glaser and Strauss (1967) note, these facets constitute an aspect of the data which, when considered together, generate a total picture. Qualitative data analysis involves organization, classification, decategorization, a search for patterns, an a synthesis of patterns, as well as the determination of missing information which requires a further search to achieve an extensive, realistic cognizance of what was observed. It is a ongoing activity th at occurs throughout the investigative process. Furthermore, data-collection, the analysis, more data-collection and more analysis until the research is completed (Bogdan and Biklen, 1982; Stainback and Stainback, 1984). The analysis of data is a continual process and occurs from data-collection to a study's conclusions. Notes taken to substantiate the observations and letters. An inquiry was undertaken either as reflections and organized analysis. The initial stage of analysis consisting of identifying the components of the letters and discussions (Briggs, 1986, pp. 104-05), reading the letters, reviewing notes, and thinking about the interviews, helped me determine the significance of themes and similarities. Once the data were collected, the letters, note and other collected materials were organized into manageable units and examined for conceivable patterns (Bogdan and Biklen, 1982). After recognizing similar themes categories of analysis were developed. This involved reading and reviewing the letters, the separate analysis of each letter, and then across-person analyses to determine common categories, if any, with which to organize responses (Glaser and Strauss, 1967). A common coding system was developed, and chunks of dialogue in each of the interviews were coded using the categories. After general analyses, including establishing patterns and categories identified in our language, Collection and analysis were conducted simultaneously, so that the initial letter readings enlightened later readings and interpretations (Lincoln and Guba, 1985; Miles and Huberman, 1984; Erickson, 1986). What we wrote and expounded upon was considered as well as possible excluded information (Price, 1987). Each letter was examined separately for individually constructed cultural models with attention given to key words, metaphors, repetitions, and generalizations. Concern for key words (words emphasized in the letters or conversation), for example, suggested that knowledge structures were organized around them (Price, 1987). Finally, because the focus was on the pattern of the group rather than the individual, the individuals' models were compared for possible shared cultural models. This analysis brought forth the filagree of understandings that these new faculty members had of their institutions, their academic culture, their instructional processes, and their students. Limitations Aware that the researcher and the researched jointly construct their world (Berger and Luckman, 1966), and that my view of the data was mediated by those I had come to observe (Rabinow, 1977), carefully struggled to insure (as much as that is possible) that the perspectives labelled in this study represented my colleagues. Reflection on and understanding of the researcher's relationship to the researched (Babcock, 1980; Crapanzano, 1980) is essential. Familiarity can generate false assumptions. Because there are no simple relationships among the researcher and the researched, RESULTS Our experiences, our conversations, and our letters affirm the literature. Constructing meaning in a new situation can be difficult, even when the situation is not completely alien. There are new roles to learn, new interactive techniques, as well as new expectations and disorientation. New faculty members are all kindred spirits. We discussed many concerns in our letters, but the most common themes will be addressed here.
Finding Balance
We wanted to balance our lives, our families, and our expectations. WE were never sure if the choices we made were the best for our futures or our well being. The uncertainty lead to our imbalance, and none of us found a mentor or colleague to support our process. Will I Ever Have a Friend?
Loneliness was addressed more than once in our letters. The work of Jackson (1968) addressing the isolation of teachers would be no less appropriate when discussing the experience of higher education. Entering a new institution away from your friends and families, causes certain problems. The feelings of isolation are intensified when, in addition, there is no colleagiality at the workplace. Will I Stay Here?
We all attempted to find ways to work the system. Tenure was a driving force, of one degree of another, at each institution. As we began to acquire the culture, we began to see what was valued and what was not.
We also felt torn by our discoveries about what was important. We valued teaching, however, our institutions did not necessarily view teaching in quite the same way. Much of our writing focused on the value of teaching in our lives, and the wrenching decisions we had to undergo when considering our own survival. Teaching concerns
As a group we viewed teaching as a road to learning. We valued our practice and examined it, with the intention of improving it. Eventually each of us was out in the field, in one capacity or another, engaged in some form of teaching - whether working with teachers or students. our chosen profession. Teaching was a prized part of our chosen profession. Interestingly in a recent study, Boice (1991) discovered that new professors (in general, not just individuals from education) are overwhelmed with teaching responsibilities, attempt to balance research with teaching, and do not plan to work on improvement of teaching; Our work flies in the face of the work done by Boice, at least with regard to teaching. He states that professors are not concerned with teaching style, blame external influences on teaching failures; are passive about change and improvement; set goals that revolve around time management and punishment; and use defensive and factual styles of teaching which regress from what they had done before. Judging from our letters and our decisions, our hearts were in teaching. We focused letters on discussions of classroom incidents. We explored our philosophies. Hoses and High Heels .... or transformation v. tradition The most pervasive concerns demonstrated both in our conversations and in our writing was the clash between the culture we were attempting to adopt as our own and our cultural model of education as transformation. Sometimes we would discuss the dress of our colleagues, wondering if we were being judged on whether or not we dressed in similar fashion. We hoped not. When one of us said
She was expressing her concern with tradition. Tradition followed us, dominated us, held us back. It was like invisible flypaper.
Our interest in transformation also caused discomfort. Although we did not meet with explicit resistance, we were often reminded that there was a legacy of tradition at our various institutions.
Sometimes our rebellious natures showed through in writing. We did not want to give in to the system because we did not feel that it supported our students or ourselves.
In fighting the system we also felt alone. There we were, the lonely crusaders. Some of us had females colleagues, although those colleagues did not often share similar views. Sometimes we attributed that to life experience.
We also discussed giving in to the system. That did not happen often.
In general, we simply felt different, because of our newness and because of our commitment to providing a different view of education. The acquisition of academic culture involves a new faculty member bringing to the professional notion of self, their family history, their school experiences, their professional training, and their beliefs about teaching and education that interact with students, professors, and others in their work. A person also brings certain cultural models that drive their view of the world. When that view conflicts with the culture they hope to adopt, much conflict and discomfort can ensue. CONCLUSIONS While many of our experiences are similar to the research that has already been done in higher education about new faculty members, there are several significant differences. One, we are all teacher educators, our familiarity with education may affect the ways that we approache teaching. Second, we are all women. Most of the work in higher education does not focus on women, although when it do - we fit the picture. Third, there have been few studies that examine the cultural perspective of cultural acquisition. When looking at information that individuals use of become a part of the culture, as well as the cultural notions shared among the members, an interesting study develops. An example of that is the clash between the culture of academe and the cultural model of transformation held by the four of us. The cultural model of transformation that brought significance to much of the work we did, is a model that directs attention to what we as women and as teachers thought we should expect and what we should be upset about in their relationships with our workplace. Although we varied in our language to communicate about our experiences, our involvement in the system; our ease with which we handled situations and the pattern of response to our colleagues, we did had similar experiences. Identification, the point at which internalization of the system has been engaged with becomes the system that they organize their self and at least some of ideas and emotions, is a difficult process. When there is a clash of established cultural model with the culture one is attempting to acquire, the process of cultural acquisition becomes quite difficult, if not insurmountable.
References
Aisenberg, N. and Harrington,
(1988). Women in academe. Amherst: U. of Ma. Press. |
©2001 Mary Lynn Hamilton. All rights reserved. Website content questions? Mary Lynn Hamilton. Website design questions? Janel Hinrichsen