Jump to content

NoirFemme

Members
  • Posts

    215
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    3

Reputation Activity

  1. Upvote
    NoirFemme got a reaction from Chiqui74 in Don't Do a PhD in History   
    I wasn't aware that being honest about what is happening in doctoral programs in the middle of a global pandemic, which is turning higher ed upside down, is gatekeeping. I find it highly irresponsible for current graduate students to tell prospective students to apply without laying out what they will probably face in programs that are in difficult positions to offer proper mentorship, research support, financial resources, and general advice. I have mentored first years in different programs since I was in my second year, and I am honest and frank with the incoming first years right now about how little advice I can give because I did not begin my program in this context. Pretending that being a doctoral student is solely about a life of the mind, or a few years to explore a dream, is the sole province of the privileged. 
    Also, I am not and will never be in the position to gatekeep academia, so throwing that accusation at me is astonishing. 
  2. Upvote
    NoirFemme got a reaction from Chiqui74 in Don't Do a PhD in History   
    I am a black woman who is also first-gen and working class.
    I should think that my background gives me qualifications for understanding the way doctoral programs are designed to not only keep people like me out and/or marginalized, but create a false reality that will leave you assed out if you don't go through the program with open eyes for your own future.
  3. Upvote
    NoirFemme got a reaction from Chiqui74 in Don't Do a PhD in History   
    Coming out of lurk mode to give my two cents: this topic was my specialty--a conversation I fought tooth and nail to have at my university--until I circumstances placed me in a position to realize that the bureaucracy of doctoral programs is not equipped to help PhD students navigate this new reality. As another poster astutely mentioned: the guaranteed salary and health insurance for 5-6 years is a convincing argument for riding out the storm in the doctoral program, but you are also stunting your career growth.
    You can get certificates in DH or archives out the wazoo, or do an internship for a few months--but if you aren't building any credible, progressive skills for a resume, you are merely treading water. Also, since many doctoral students come fresh out of undergraduate or 1-2 years after undergrad, they are emerging from a PhD program at 29/30 without any real world work experience. The private, govt, and academic sectors are hammered by the pandemic. Who is going to make it past the application stage: a 30 year old PhD with no job experience or a 30 year old with direct job experience (bc remember, most people applying for specific jobs went to school to major in that field)?
    But again, doctoral programs are not built to address this. Your coursework, your writing assignments, your dissertation, your conference presentations, your TA assignments, and so on are geared towards preparing you for a TT job. You aren't supposed to get a job. Graduate fellowships geared towards some type of vocational training (e.g. editorial assistant at a university press) are few and far between. Your advisors' only assistance is to bring in alums or other PhD "alt acs" to discuss their experiences--they cannot and often will not help you be legible inside and outside of the academy.
    It is, IMO, the height of conceit to say you're pursuing the PhD to research and write and read for 5-6 years. The only people who say that are those who have a tiny kernel of belief that they'll be the one to beat the odds and get the TT job at the end of the journey. 
    I don't think you shouldn't go for the PhD--my opinion right now is that those whose first dream is to be a professor need to be the last people applying to PhD programs. 
  4. Upvote
    NoirFemme got a reaction from Boarskin in Don't Do a PhD in History   
    Coming out of lurk mode to give my two cents: this topic was my specialty--a conversation I fought tooth and nail to have at my university--until I circumstances placed me in a position to realize that the bureaucracy of doctoral programs is not equipped to help PhD students navigate this new reality. As another poster astutely mentioned: the guaranteed salary and health insurance for 5-6 years is a convincing argument for riding out the storm in the doctoral program, but you are also stunting your career growth.
    You can get certificates in DH or archives out the wazoo, or do an internship for a few months--but if you aren't building any credible, progressive skills for a resume, you are merely treading water. Also, since many doctoral students come fresh out of undergraduate or 1-2 years after undergrad, they are emerging from a PhD program at 29/30 without any real world work experience. The private, govt, and academic sectors are hammered by the pandemic. Who is going to make it past the application stage: a 30 year old PhD with no job experience or a 30 year old with direct job experience (bc remember, most people applying for specific jobs went to school to major in that field)?
    But again, doctoral programs are not built to address this. Your coursework, your writing assignments, your dissertation, your conference presentations, your TA assignments, and so on are geared towards preparing you for a TT job. You aren't supposed to get a job. Graduate fellowships geared towards some type of vocational training (e.g. editorial assistant at a university press) are few and far between. Your advisors' only assistance is to bring in alums or other PhD "alt acs" to discuss their experiences--they cannot and often will not help you be legible inside and outside of the academy.
    It is, IMO, the height of conceit to say you're pursuing the PhD to research and write and read for 5-6 years. The only people who say that are those who have a tiny kernel of belief that they'll be the one to beat the odds and get the TT job at the end of the journey. 
    I don't think you shouldn't go for the PhD--my opinion right now is that those whose first dream is to be a professor need to be the last people applying to PhD programs. 
  5. Upvote
    NoirFemme got a reaction from Maple1eaf in Don't Do a PhD in History   
    I wasn't aware that being honest about what is happening in doctoral programs in the middle of a global pandemic, which is turning higher ed upside down, is gatekeeping. I find it highly irresponsible for current graduate students to tell prospective students to apply without laying out what they will probably face in programs that are in difficult positions to offer proper mentorship, research support, financial resources, and general advice. I have mentored first years in different programs since I was in my second year, and I am honest and frank with the incoming first years right now about how little advice I can give because I did not begin my program in this context. Pretending that being a doctoral student is solely about a life of the mind, or a few years to explore a dream, is the sole province of the privileged. 
    Also, I am not and will never be in the position to gatekeep academia, so throwing that accusation at me is astonishing. 
  6. Upvote
    NoirFemme got a reaction from Procopius in Don't Do a PhD in History   
    Coming out of lurk mode to give my two cents: this topic was my specialty--a conversation I fought tooth and nail to have at my university--until I circumstances placed me in a position to realize that the bureaucracy of doctoral programs is not equipped to help PhD students navigate this new reality. As another poster astutely mentioned: the guaranteed salary and health insurance for 5-6 years is a convincing argument for riding out the storm in the doctoral program, but you are also stunting your career growth.
    You can get certificates in DH or archives out the wazoo, or do an internship for a few months--but if you aren't building any credible, progressive skills for a resume, you are merely treading water. Also, since many doctoral students come fresh out of undergraduate or 1-2 years after undergrad, they are emerging from a PhD program at 29/30 without any real world work experience. The private, govt, and academic sectors are hammered by the pandemic. Who is going to make it past the application stage: a 30 year old PhD with no job experience or a 30 year old with direct job experience (bc remember, most people applying for specific jobs went to school to major in that field)?
    But again, doctoral programs are not built to address this. Your coursework, your writing assignments, your dissertation, your conference presentations, your TA assignments, and so on are geared towards preparing you for a TT job. You aren't supposed to get a job. Graduate fellowships geared towards some type of vocational training (e.g. editorial assistant at a university press) are few and far between. Your advisors' only assistance is to bring in alums or other PhD "alt acs" to discuss their experiences--they cannot and often will not help you be legible inside and outside of the academy.
    It is, IMO, the height of conceit to say you're pursuing the PhD to research and write and read for 5-6 years. The only people who say that are those who have a tiny kernel of belief that they'll be the one to beat the odds and get the TT job at the end of the journey. 
    I don't think you shouldn't go for the PhD--my opinion right now is that those whose first dream is to be a professor need to be the last people applying to PhD programs. 
  7. Upvote
    NoirFemme got a reaction from Calgacus in Don't Do a PhD in History   
    I wasn't aware that being honest about what is happening in doctoral programs in the middle of a global pandemic, which is turning higher ed upside down, is gatekeeping. I find it highly irresponsible for current graduate students to tell prospective students to apply without laying out what they will probably face in programs that are in difficult positions to offer proper mentorship, research support, financial resources, and general advice. I have mentored first years in different programs since I was in my second year, and I am honest and frank with the incoming first years right now about how little advice I can give because I did not begin my program in this context. Pretending that being a doctoral student is solely about a life of the mind, or a few years to explore a dream, is the sole province of the privileged. 
    Also, I am not and will never be in the position to gatekeep academia, so throwing that accusation at me is astonishing. 
  8. Upvote
    NoirFemme got a reaction from Calgacus in Don't Do a PhD in History   
    I am a black woman who is also first-gen and working class.
    I should think that my background gives me qualifications for understanding the way doctoral programs are designed to not only keep people like me out and/or marginalized, but create a false reality that will leave you assed out if you don't go through the program with open eyes for your own future.
  9. Upvote
    NoirFemme got a reaction from Calgacus in Don't Do a PhD in History   
    Coming out of lurk mode to give my two cents: this topic was my specialty--a conversation I fought tooth and nail to have at my university--until I circumstances placed me in a position to realize that the bureaucracy of doctoral programs is not equipped to help PhD students navigate this new reality. As another poster astutely mentioned: the guaranteed salary and health insurance for 5-6 years is a convincing argument for riding out the storm in the doctoral program, but you are also stunting your career growth.
    You can get certificates in DH or archives out the wazoo, or do an internship for a few months--but if you aren't building any credible, progressive skills for a resume, you are merely treading water. Also, since many doctoral students come fresh out of undergraduate or 1-2 years after undergrad, they are emerging from a PhD program at 29/30 without any real world work experience. The private, govt, and academic sectors are hammered by the pandemic. Who is going to make it past the application stage: a 30 year old PhD with no job experience or a 30 year old with direct job experience (bc remember, most people applying for specific jobs went to school to major in that field)?
    But again, doctoral programs are not built to address this. Your coursework, your writing assignments, your dissertation, your conference presentations, your TA assignments, and so on are geared towards preparing you for a TT job. You aren't supposed to get a job. Graduate fellowships geared towards some type of vocational training (e.g. editorial assistant at a university press) are few and far between. Your advisors' only assistance is to bring in alums or other PhD "alt acs" to discuss their experiences--they cannot and often will not help you be legible inside and outside of the academy.
    It is, IMO, the height of conceit to say you're pursuing the PhD to research and write and read for 5-6 years. The only people who say that are those who have a tiny kernel of belief that they'll be the one to beat the odds and get the TT job at the end of the journey. 
    I don't think you shouldn't go for the PhD--my opinion right now is that those whose first dream is to be a professor need to be the last people applying to PhD programs. 
  10. Upvote
    NoirFemme got a reaction from ExponentialDecay in Don't Do a PhD in History   
    I wasn't aware that being honest about what is happening in doctoral programs in the middle of a global pandemic, which is turning higher ed upside down, is gatekeeping. I find it highly irresponsible for current graduate students to tell prospective students to apply without laying out what they will probably face in programs that are in difficult positions to offer proper mentorship, research support, financial resources, and general advice. I have mentored first years in different programs since I was in my second year, and I am honest and frank with the incoming first years right now about how little advice I can give because I did not begin my program in this context. Pretending that being a doctoral student is solely about a life of the mind, or a few years to explore a dream, is the sole province of the privileged. 
    Also, I am not and will never be in the position to gatekeep academia, so throwing that accusation at me is astonishing. 
  11. Upvote
    NoirFemme got a reaction from ExponentialDecay in Don't Do a PhD in History   
    I am a black woman who is also first-gen and working class.
    I should think that my background gives me qualifications for understanding the way doctoral programs are designed to not only keep people like me out and/or marginalized, but create a false reality that will leave you assed out if you don't go through the program with open eyes for your own future.
  12. Upvote
    NoirFemme got a reaction from Boolakanaka in Don't Do a PhD in History   
    I am a black woman who is also first-gen and working class.
    I should think that my background gives me qualifications for understanding the way doctoral programs are designed to not only keep people like me out and/or marginalized, but create a false reality that will leave you assed out if you don't go through the program with open eyes for your own future.
  13. Like
    NoirFemme got a reaction from emhafe in Don't Do a PhD in History   
    Coming out of lurk mode to give my two cents: this topic was my specialty--a conversation I fought tooth and nail to have at my university--until I circumstances placed me in a position to realize that the bureaucracy of doctoral programs is not equipped to help PhD students navigate this new reality. As another poster astutely mentioned: the guaranteed salary and health insurance for 5-6 years is a convincing argument for riding out the storm in the doctoral program, but you are also stunting your career growth.
    You can get certificates in DH or archives out the wazoo, or do an internship for a few months--but if you aren't building any credible, progressive skills for a resume, you are merely treading water. Also, since many doctoral students come fresh out of undergraduate or 1-2 years after undergrad, they are emerging from a PhD program at 29/30 without any real world work experience. The private, govt, and academic sectors are hammered by the pandemic. Who is going to make it past the application stage: a 30 year old PhD with no job experience or a 30 year old with direct job experience (bc remember, most people applying for specific jobs went to school to major in that field)?
    But again, doctoral programs are not built to address this. Your coursework, your writing assignments, your dissertation, your conference presentations, your TA assignments, and so on are geared towards preparing you for a TT job. You aren't supposed to get a job. Graduate fellowships geared towards some type of vocational training (e.g. editorial assistant at a university press) are few and far between. Your advisors' only assistance is to bring in alums or other PhD "alt acs" to discuss their experiences--they cannot and often will not help you be legible inside and outside of the academy.
    It is, IMO, the height of conceit to say you're pursuing the PhD to research and write and read for 5-6 years. The only people who say that are those who have a tiny kernel of belief that they'll be the one to beat the odds and get the TT job at the end of the journey. 
    I don't think you shouldn't go for the PhD--my opinion right now is that those whose first dream is to be a professor need to be the last people applying to PhD programs. 
  14. Upvote
    NoirFemme got a reaction from coffeehum in Don't Do a PhD in History   
    I wasn't aware that being honest about what is happening in doctoral programs in the middle of a global pandemic, which is turning higher ed upside down, is gatekeeping. I find it highly irresponsible for current graduate students to tell prospective students to apply without laying out what they will probably face in programs that are in difficult positions to offer proper mentorship, research support, financial resources, and general advice. I have mentored first years in different programs since I was in my second year, and I am honest and frank with the incoming first years right now about how little advice I can give because I did not begin my program in this context. Pretending that being a doctoral student is solely about a life of the mind, or a few years to explore a dream, is the sole province of the privileged. 
    Also, I am not and will never be in the position to gatekeep academia, so throwing that accusation at me is astonishing. 
  15. Upvote
    NoirFemme got a reaction from dr. t in Don't Do a PhD in History   
    I wasn't aware that being honest about what is happening in doctoral programs in the middle of a global pandemic, which is turning higher ed upside down, is gatekeeping. I find it highly irresponsible for current graduate students to tell prospective students to apply without laying out what they will probably face in programs that are in difficult positions to offer proper mentorship, research support, financial resources, and general advice. I have mentored first years in different programs since I was in my second year, and I am honest and frank with the incoming first years right now about how little advice I can give because I did not begin my program in this context. Pretending that being a doctoral student is solely about a life of the mind, or a few years to explore a dream, is the sole province of the privileged. 
    Also, I am not and will never be in the position to gatekeep academia, so throwing that accusation at me is astonishing. 
  16. Upvote
    NoirFemme got a reaction from dr. t in Don't Do a PhD in History   
    I am a black woman who is also first-gen and working class.
    I should think that my background gives me qualifications for understanding the way doctoral programs are designed to not only keep people like me out and/or marginalized, but create a false reality that will leave you assed out if you don't go through the program with open eyes for your own future.
  17. Upvote
    NoirFemme got a reaction from coffeehum in Don't Do a PhD in History   
    Coming out of lurk mode to give my two cents: this topic was my specialty--a conversation I fought tooth and nail to have at my university--until I circumstances placed me in a position to realize that the bureaucracy of doctoral programs is not equipped to help PhD students navigate this new reality. As another poster astutely mentioned: the guaranteed salary and health insurance for 5-6 years is a convincing argument for riding out the storm in the doctoral program, but you are also stunting your career growth.
    You can get certificates in DH or archives out the wazoo, or do an internship for a few months--but if you aren't building any credible, progressive skills for a resume, you are merely treading water. Also, since many doctoral students come fresh out of undergraduate or 1-2 years after undergrad, they are emerging from a PhD program at 29/30 without any real world work experience. The private, govt, and academic sectors are hammered by the pandemic. Who is going to make it past the application stage: a 30 year old PhD with no job experience or a 30 year old with direct job experience (bc remember, most people applying for specific jobs went to school to major in that field)?
    But again, doctoral programs are not built to address this. Your coursework, your writing assignments, your dissertation, your conference presentations, your TA assignments, and so on are geared towards preparing you for a TT job. You aren't supposed to get a job. Graduate fellowships geared towards some type of vocational training (e.g. editorial assistant at a university press) are few and far between. Your advisors' only assistance is to bring in alums or other PhD "alt acs" to discuss their experiences--they cannot and often will not help you be legible inside and outside of the academy.
    It is, IMO, the height of conceit to say you're pursuing the PhD to research and write and read for 5-6 years. The only people who say that are those who have a tiny kernel of belief that they'll be the one to beat the odds and get the TT job at the end of the journey. 
    I don't think you shouldn't go for the PhD--my opinion right now is that those whose first dream is to be a professor need to be the last people applying to PhD programs. 
  18. Upvote
    NoirFemme got a reaction from coffeehum in Don't Do a PhD in History   
    I am a black woman who is also first-gen and working class.
    I should think that my background gives me qualifications for understanding the way doctoral programs are designed to not only keep people like me out and/or marginalized, but create a false reality that will leave you assed out if you don't go through the program with open eyes for your own future.
  19. Upvote
    NoirFemme got a reaction from AfricanusCrowther in Don't Do a PhD in History   
    I am a black woman who is also first-gen and working class.
    I should think that my background gives me qualifications for understanding the way doctoral programs are designed to not only keep people like me out and/or marginalized, but create a false reality that will leave you assed out if you don't go through the program with open eyes for your own future.
  20. Upvote
    NoirFemme got a reaction from dr. t in Don't Do a PhD in History   
    Coming out of lurk mode to give my two cents: this topic was my specialty--a conversation I fought tooth and nail to have at my university--until I circumstances placed me in a position to realize that the bureaucracy of doctoral programs is not equipped to help PhD students navigate this new reality. As another poster astutely mentioned: the guaranteed salary and health insurance for 5-6 years is a convincing argument for riding out the storm in the doctoral program, but you are also stunting your career growth.
    You can get certificates in DH or archives out the wazoo, or do an internship for a few months--but if you aren't building any credible, progressive skills for a resume, you are merely treading water. Also, since many doctoral students come fresh out of undergraduate or 1-2 years after undergrad, they are emerging from a PhD program at 29/30 without any real world work experience. The private, govt, and academic sectors are hammered by the pandemic. Who is going to make it past the application stage: a 30 year old PhD with no job experience or a 30 year old with direct job experience (bc remember, most people applying for specific jobs went to school to major in that field)?
    But again, doctoral programs are not built to address this. Your coursework, your writing assignments, your dissertation, your conference presentations, your TA assignments, and so on are geared towards preparing you for a TT job. You aren't supposed to get a job. Graduate fellowships geared towards some type of vocational training (e.g. editorial assistant at a university press) are few and far between. Your advisors' only assistance is to bring in alums or other PhD "alt acs" to discuss their experiences--they cannot and often will not help you be legible inside and outside of the academy.
    It is, IMO, the height of conceit to say you're pursuing the PhD to research and write and read for 5-6 years. The only people who say that are those who have a tiny kernel of belief that they'll be the one to beat the odds and get the TT job at the end of the journey. 
    I don't think you shouldn't go for the PhD--my opinion right now is that those whose first dream is to be a professor need to be the last people applying to PhD programs. 
  21. Upvote
    NoirFemme got a reaction from AfricanusCrowther in Don't Do a PhD in History   
    Coming out of lurk mode to give my two cents: this topic was my specialty--a conversation I fought tooth and nail to have at my university--until I circumstances placed me in a position to realize that the bureaucracy of doctoral programs is not equipped to help PhD students navigate this new reality. As another poster astutely mentioned: the guaranteed salary and health insurance for 5-6 years is a convincing argument for riding out the storm in the doctoral program, but you are also stunting your career growth.
    You can get certificates in DH or archives out the wazoo, or do an internship for a few months--but if you aren't building any credible, progressive skills for a resume, you are merely treading water. Also, since many doctoral students come fresh out of undergraduate or 1-2 years after undergrad, they are emerging from a PhD program at 29/30 without any real world work experience. The private, govt, and academic sectors are hammered by the pandemic. Who is going to make it past the application stage: a 30 year old PhD with no job experience or a 30 year old with direct job experience (bc remember, most people applying for specific jobs went to school to major in that field)?
    But again, doctoral programs are not built to address this. Your coursework, your writing assignments, your dissertation, your conference presentations, your TA assignments, and so on are geared towards preparing you for a TT job. You aren't supposed to get a job. Graduate fellowships geared towards some type of vocational training (e.g. editorial assistant at a university press) are few and far between. Your advisors' only assistance is to bring in alums or other PhD "alt acs" to discuss their experiences--they cannot and often will not help you be legible inside and outside of the academy.
    It is, IMO, the height of conceit to say you're pursuing the PhD to research and write and read for 5-6 years. The only people who say that are those who have a tiny kernel of belief that they'll be the one to beat the odds and get the TT job at the end of the journey. 
    I don't think you shouldn't go for the PhD--my opinion right now is that those whose first dream is to be a professor need to be the last people applying to PhD programs. 
  22. Upvote
    NoirFemme got a reaction from GradSchoolGrad in Don't Do a PhD in History   
    Coming out of lurk mode to give my two cents: this topic was my specialty--a conversation I fought tooth and nail to have at my university--until I circumstances placed me in a position to realize that the bureaucracy of doctoral programs is not equipped to help PhD students navigate this new reality. As another poster astutely mentioned: the guaranteed salary and health insurance for 5-6 years is a convincing argument for riding out the storm in the doctoral program, but you are also stunting your career growth.
    You can get certificates in DH or archives out the wazoo, or do an internship for a few months--but if you aren't building any credible, progressive skills for a resume, you are merely treading water. Also, since many doctoral students come fresh out of undergraduate or 1-2 years after undergrad, they are emerging from a PhD program at 29/30 without any real world work experience. The private, govt, and academic sectors are hammered by the pandemic. Who is going to make it past the application stage: a 30 year old PhD with no job experience or a 30 year old with direct job experience (bc remember, most people applying for specific jobs went to school to major in that field)?
    But again, doctoral programs are not built to address this. Your coursework, your writing assignments, your dissertation, your conference presentations, your TA assignments, and so on are geared towards preparing you for a TT job. You aren't supposed to get a job. Graduate fellowships geared towards some type of vocational training (e.g. editorial assistant at a university press) are few and far between. Your advisors' only assistance is to bring in alums or other PhD "alt acs" to discuss their experiences--they cannot and often will not help you be legible inside and outside of the academy.
    It is, IMO, the height of conceit to say you're pursuing the PhD to research and write and read for 5-6 years. The only people who say that are those who have a tiny kernel of belief that they'll be the one to beat the odds and get the TT job at the end of the journey. 
    I don't think you shouldn't go for the PhD--my opinion right now is that those whose first dream is to be a professor need to be the last people applying to PhD programs. 
  23. Upvote
    NoirFemme reacted to Irvine student in Query Regarding South Asian History Graduate Programs   
    @Sigaba I did try to bring these concerns to the department, and even outside, however to no avail. It only made my situation more precarious. Now I am no longer in the Department. However, when I look back the time I spent at UCI History Dept, I wish the same for none. And worst of all, other graduate students also had similar experiences, which made me believe this Dept is a place that needs to be exposed.
    I had an admission offer from another department and only if I knew the experiences of other senior graduate students in the Dept, I would have made a more informed choice and gone there. Which is why I am writing my experiences here, so any graduate student in South Asian History doesn’t make the ill- informed choice of going there. Making a Career in gradaute school is already too hard, and prospective graduate students should  have all the support and information from the experiences of their seniors in making the best choice available.
  24. Upvote
    NoirFemme reacted to Irvine student in Query Regarding South Asian History Graduate Programs   
    I would like to share here a warning for prospective PhD in South Asia students. I had joined PhD in University of California Irvine in Vinayak Chaturvedi’s supervision. I tried to inquire about his past records but no one was honest with me, which is why I am writing on this platform. He has not graduated a single student in his entire career of 20+ years. He is extremely abusive towards his grad students, and my experience was extremely negative. I and most of his other students had to leave the PhD program after years of torture and ill treatment. In general, the department is extremely toxic and they like to make students apologize to faculty again and again, something I had never experienced in India. The faculty stand together and gang up against powerless graduate student and single them out. Additionally, I would also like to inform grad students that UCI History Department does a year end review of 1st year PhD students, where they weed students out. There is blatant racism and sexism, as confided by a professor of the Department to me. I can vouch for that based on my own experience. I would never recommend UCI History Department to any grad student ever because of the general toxicity and racism rampant there. 
  25. Upvote
    NoirFemme got a reaction from time_consume_me in 2021 Application Thread   
    No. Because the toes stepped on have to respect the hell out of my work and my prominent external recognition. 
    Maybe my perspective is based on being a WOC, who learned very quickly that the institution of academia regularly grinds out POC. Not to mention that I would not have the CV I have without these core values being at the forefront of my work and experience. 
    I'm curious about what two ways of transformation you mean. Personality wise? Public speaking? Writing skills? Or is it just intellectual?
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. See our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use