Friday, June 20, 2003
I've been trying to figure out, as I prepare for the 2003-2004 academic year, how the last line of defense that is the collective department chairs can best function under the new management structure Diablo Valley College has. I realize that some of the department chairs just want to get along with their deans (these imposed-from-above occupiers of what was once a faculty position) and get what they can for their programs and for their fellow faculty. I realize too that my fantasy of the chairs--as the Department Chairs Council or whatever we could become--is at this point just a fantasy. We meet the week before classes, with union and academic support, to figure out what we can and will try to do.
Still, a week or so ago I wrote to the VP of Something-of-Other to ask her if, when offices are assigned for next year, the dept. chairs could have one, as a central locale where we could share info, resources. The space is probably available; after all, we're not hiring full-time instructors during this budget crisis and we can always cram the part-timers into some corner or another (that's what we do now). But I have trouble imagining the VP wanting to legitimate our existence *as* a body. (I note that she hasn't responded--the most used tool of the administration seems to be the refusal to communicate. Strategy question: what is the best moment to send the follow-up query ["perhaps you didn't get my earlier message...."]?)
But my real question is, how necessary in an age of electronic communication *is* a physical space out of which to operate a corner of a resistance? I'll grant that that chairs thus far have been terrible at using e-mail to communicate with each other (thus when the X Dept voted no confidence in its--"their"?--dean, none of us knew right away; that would be unheard of in English, where we constantly share info on-line). But we can certainly call meetings, sit with each other in offices, empty classrooms, conference rooms, cafeterias, even off-campus. What *would* the advantage of an office for the fledgling group be, beyond my desire to put up a sign on the door that says, "No deanz allowed"?
Still, a week or so ago I wrote to the VP of Something-of-Other to ask her if, when offices are assigned for next year, the dept. chairs could have one, as a central locale where we could share info, resources. The space is probably available; after all, we're not hiring full-time instructors during this budget crisis and we can always cram the part-timers into some corner or another (that's what we do now). But I have trouble imagining the VP wanting to legitimate our existence *as* a body. (I note that she hasn't responded--the most used tool of the administration seems to be the refusal to communicate. Strategy question: what is the best moment to send the follow-up query ["perhaps you didn't get my earlier message...."]?)
But my real question is, how necessary in an age of electronic communication *is* a physical space out of which to operate a corner of a resistance? I'll grant that that chairs thus far have been terrible at using e-mail to communicate with each other (thus when the X Dept voted no confidence in its--"their"?--dean, none of us knew right away; that would be unheard of in English, where we constantly share info on-line). But we can certainly call meetings, sit with each other in offices, empty classrooms, conference rooms, cafeterias, even off-campus. What *would* the advantage of an office for the fledgling group be, beyond my desire to put up a sign on the door that says, "No deanz allowed"?
Comments:
Post a Comment
