I just submitted the revised manuscript of the 2nd edition U.S. and Latin American Relations to Wiley (my last update on the book was a month ago). I had three excellent reviewers, who will see the fruits of their considerable labor. There wasn't much overhaul but a lot of small things added up--I also switched the order of two chapters.
I've already been trying to address various permissions issues (for photos and primary documents) and now we hopefully will be able to move forward fairly quickly. But there are still various tasks to complete:
1. Permissions get finalized.
2. The manuscript will have to be formatted and copy-edited.
3. I go over all the copy-edits
4. I get a fresh set of page proofs and make an index
5. We agree on cover art
Looking back, I see that it was exactly one year ago that I signed the contract with Wiley and started work. There has been a lot of intense work since then.
This will be out in 2015, likely spring, knock on wood! It will be fun to see it in print so many years after the first edition was published. If you want a taste, go buy a cheap used old edition and see if you would be interested in having it all updated and expanded.
Showing posts with label Academia. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Academia. Show all posts
Thursday, October 9, 2014
Wednesday, October 8, 2014
Textbook Skyping
Today I skyped with a class on U.S.-Latin American relations that is using my book, which was fun (even though I am slowly getting over a cold and had a brief coughing fit in the middle!). I know anecdotally that people (instructors and students) who use one of my books often check out my blog, so I want to let you know I am more than happy to do the same if you're interested. I love engaging with students who are reading my stuff--it likely will sound terribly cliche, but they're the ones I'm really writing for. Just shoot me an email.
Interview on Understanding Latin American Politics
If you want to hear me talk about my book Understanding Latin American Politics, here is the link to an interview I did with Keith Simmons for New Books in Latin American Studies. Incidentally, it is not what I normally sound like--I am slowly getting over a cold that left me hoarse.
Monday, September 22, 2014
College Costs and State Legislatures
Major kudos to economist Susan Dynarski for articulating what many of us in public universities see up close. In short, the reason tuition has been increasing so much is that state legislatures are paying less and less per student.
The last point is really important. It is common to hear about rich presidents, too many assistant provosts, extravagant dorms, and the like, ignoring the question of state funding entirely. Some of these arguments have merit, but they are not the core problem (and, in fact, increased oversight demands sometimes requires new administrative positions we'd rather not be forced to create, but the paperwork is literally overwhelming otherwise). The most pressing problem is that state legislatures too often just don't want to provide the necessary funding. Therefore the burden goes to the student.
She goes on to note how President Obama's ideas about using ratings will not work too well, in large part because there is such a huge difference in-state and out-of-state tuition. If you think one state system to too expensive, you can't go to another state and get a deal unless you become a resident.
Well worth a read--I hope it gets traction.
h/t Tyler Cowen
In 1988, state legislatures gave their public colleges an average of $8,600 a student. Students contributed an additional $2,700 in tuition, which gets us to a total of $11,300. By 2013, states were kicking in just $6,100, while students were contributing $5,400; this gets us to a total of $11,500.
As far as students are concerned, public tuition has doubled. As far as public colleges are concerned, funding is flat.
At public colleges, then, the explanation for rising tuition prices isn’t spiraling costs. The costs are the same, but the burden of paying those costs has shifted from state taxpayers to students.
The last point is really important. It is common to hear about rich presidents, too many assistant provosts, extravagant dorms, and the like, ignoring the question of state funding entirely. Some of these arguments have merit, but they are not the core problem (and, in fact, increased oversight demands sometimes requires new administrative positions we'd rather not be forced to create, but the paperwork is literally overwhelming otherwise). The most pressing problem is that state legislatures too often just don't want to provide the necessary funding. Therefore the burden goes to the student.
She goes on to note how President Obama's ideas about using ratings will not work too well, in large part because there is such a huge difference in-state and out-of-state tuition. If you think one state system to too expensive, you can't go to another state and get a deal unless you become a resident.
Well worth a read--I hope it gets traction.
h/t Tyler Cowen
Friday, September 12, 2014
Progress on 2nd Edition of U.S. and Latin American Relations
Continuing on my year-long periodic posts (the last one was in July) on doing the revisions/additions to the 2nd edition of U.S. and Latin American Relations, I've received the three anonymous external reviews and they are all positive. They all also have many suggestions and corrections--14 pages single-spaced in all. The peer review process in academia is often screwy and even mean, but these comments are really helpful.
And humbling. If you have someone extremely knowledgeable reading (and doing so thoroughly), then he/she will find the errors. This gets down to noting, for example, that the Sandino rebellion started in 1927, not 1926 as I had written, because in 1926 he was a general fighting a civil war but it had not yet become an anti-imperialist war. Obviously, these observations improve the quality of the book immensely. I do get frustrated that I made them in the first place!
At any rate, my goal is to get all of these revisions completed within four weeks.
And humbling. If you have someone extremely knowledgeable reading (and doing so thoroughly), then he/she will find the errors. This gets down to noting, for example, that the Sandino rebellion started in 1927, not 1926 as I had written, because in 1926 he was a general fighting a civil war but it had not yet become an anti-imperialist war. Obviously, these observations improve the quality of the book immensely. I do get frustrated that I made them in the first place!
At any rate, my goal is to get all of these revisions completed within four weeks.
Tuesday, September 9, 2014
SECOLAS 2015 in Charleston
If you study Latin America, you should come to Charleston March 12-14, 2015 for the Southeastern Council of Latin American Studies. Always a great conference--I've been going for years. Click here for the Facebook page, which has the Call for Papers and other info. If you have questions, feel free to contact me as well.
Wednesday, September 3, 2014
Addressing Grade Inflation
UNC Chapel Hill has come up with a new way to address grade inflation. From now on, transcripts will provide additional context:
My first reaction is that this will look so complicated that employers will continue to look directly at the bottom line, namely overall GPA, to the extent that they scrutinize the transcript at all. It may well be valuable to Ph.D. programs trying to decide who they will admit. Those are, however, a very small minority of all undergraduates.
Plus, it may well have a negative impact, as students will swap stories about what classes have the highest average grades, which of course immediately are more desirable if you want to pad your GPA.
What's striking here is that the universities mentioned in the article seem to have abandoned the idea of asking professors why they are grading so high in the first place. There are vague references to students demanding more, but why not say no? I might be missing something because I rarely have the experience of students believing they deserve a good grade on everything. Yes, I get plenty of "well, I NEED a B in this class," though this is usually born of desperation rather than narcissism. But this story is aimed at elite universities which seem to have a student body that feels more entitled.
Next to a student’s grade, the record will include the median grade of classmates, the percentile range and the number of students in the class section. Another new measure, alongside the grade point average, is the schedule point average. A snapshot average grade for a student’s mix of courses, the SPA is akin to a sports team’s strength of schedule.
The nuanced transcripts will provide more information for graduate schools and employers, who should be better able to judge the difference between good and excellent performance. An A- in psychology might not look so swell when the average grade in the class is an A. On the other hand, an A- in physics looks downright impressive if the class average is a C+.
My first reaction is that this will look so complicated that employers will continue to look directly at the bottom line, namely overall GPA, to the extent that they scrutinize the transcript at all. It may well be valuable to Ph.D. programs trying to decide who they will admit. Those are, however, a very small minority of all undergraduates.
Plus, it may well have a negative impact, as students will swap stories about what classes have the highest average grades, which of course immediately are more desirable if you want to pad your GPA.
Indiana University used to do it, but stopped because of a software change. Dartmouth College and Cornell University include median grades on transcripts. Cornell used to publish the information online, but quit in 2011 after a study revealed that enrollment spiked in classes with a median grade of A.
What's striking here is that the universities mentioned in the article seem to have abandoned the idea of asking professors why they are grading so high in the first place. There are vague references to students demanding more, but why not say no? I might be missing something because I rarely have the experience of students believing they deserve a good grade on everything. Yes, I get plenty of "well, I NEED a B in this class," though this is usually born of desperation rather than narcissism. But this story is aimed at elite universities which seem to have a student body that feels more entitled.
Friday, July 25, 2014
U.S. and Latin American Relations Manuscript
I just submitted the manuscript for the 2nd edition of U.S. and Latin American Relations to Wiley. My deadline was August so I am slightly ahead of the game. It's been roughly seven months of sometimes pretty intense reading, chopping, writing, and re-writing while continually searching for new sources and documents to highlight. Several snow days during a busy time of the semester in February helped me tremendously because I sat at home with no meetings, classes, etc. and just worked. I am thinking of thanking the snow in my acknowledgments.
Tuesday, July 22, 2014
Political Science Job Market
Mike Allison pointed out this article by Aaron Hoffman (from Purdue) on the political science job market and it is encouraging.
As you would expect, political theorists have by far the toughest time--small departments may not have one at all and larger departments may only have one:
But overall the market isn't bad:
Good! He also tackles the question of going on the market while ABD and comes to a sensible conclusion:
Speaking from experience as a chair who has run four assistant professor searches in the past two years, I agree completely. Being ABD is fine if your advisor tells us you will finish before you arrive--for a job starting in August that obviously means finishing no later than the summer.
In general, this is nice to see.
Combined, there are more academic and nonacademic job openings advertised than candidates and, overall, competition for assistant professor positions is less intense than it was in 2009-2010. However, the market for assistant professors has not loosened up for everyone. On the contrary, in some sub-fields there were more applicants per assistant professor position in 2012-2013 than during the recession-hit 2009-2010 market.
As you would expect, political theorists have by far the toughest time--small departments may not have one at all and larger departments may only have one:
But overall the market isn't bad:
- Slightly more than 79% of Ph.D.s in political science secured employment at the time of their graduation in 2012-2013. This success rate is about 10 percentage points better than Ph.Ds in other social science disciplines.
Good! He also tackles the question of going on the market while ABD and comes to a sensible conclusion:
A more difficult question to answer is whether students should wait to complete their dissertations before searching for jobs. The APSA’s data suggests that finishing is a key to success on the market. This convinces me that students with uncertain completion dates should consider delaying their job searches. My experience on job search committees and watching students from my program on the market, though, suggests that those who can credibly tell hiring committees that they are close to defending are still able to secure good positions.
Speaking from experience as a chair who has run four assistant professor searches in the past two years, I agree completely. Being ABD is fine if your advisor tells us you will finish before you arrive--for a job starting in August that obviously means finishing no later than the summer.
In general, this is nice to see.
Thursday, July 10, 2014
U.S. and Latin American Relations writing (part 9)
It's been a while since I've updated but I've made tons of progress, to the point that I don't need to think in terms of chapter goals anymore. Every existing chapter has been revised and I've completed a draft of the new chapter (on the challenge to hegemony) that I am now attacking with a pen. There is more work to do but it is doable--it involves finding another book or two for suggested additional readings to replace old ones that perhaps are dated; making some additions to the chapter timelines; going over sources, especially internet ones that disappeared or changed (my thanks to those websites that did not change over what was sometimes 10 years since I last referenced them!); cleaning up footnotes; and checking a few facts for updates (like ratification of treaties/agreements).
In short, I will have this book manuscript submitted by the end of this month. What I hope is that the final book is ready for adoption for Fall 2015 classes. But what authors hope for books and what happens rarely match (for me, they have never matched). There are all sorts of unexpected delays and that's just the way it is. For my recently published Understanding Latin American Politics book among other things I spent months dealing with permissions issues. It was maddeningly slow but it had to be done right. I was sent long Excel spreadsheets that I had to read and comment on, which sometimes entailed changing or deleting content because a permission just couldn't be obtained.
In short, I will have this book manuscript submitted by the end of this month. What I hope is that the final book is ready for adoption for Fall 2015 classes. But what authors hope for books and what happens rarely match (for me, they have never matched). There are all sorts of unexpected delays and that's just the way it is. For my recently published Understanding Latin American Politics book among other things I spent months dealing with permissions issues. It was maddeningly slow but it had to be done right. I was sent long Excel spreadsheets that I had to read and comment on, which sometimes entailed changing or deleting content because a permission just couldn't be obtained.
Monday, July 7, 2014
FOIA Virtual Reading Room
I had a nice chat with Steven Hyland today, who mentioned the State Department's Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) archives online. What a cool resource. The document collection includes Argentina, Chile, El Salvador, Guatemala, and Henry Kissinger's phone (where he plotted in favor of the military in all four countries). Indeed, I did a quick search for Chile within that particular archive, and the first document is a 1975 phone conversation with Robert McNamara (who after his disastrous stint as Secretary of Defense went to the World Bank) telling him the Chilean dictatorship really needed help with loans (or Chile would go to an "extreme form of Marxism").
The whole thing is searchable and very easy to navigate. I am really busy this afternoon so have to resist the urge to poke around much more at the moment.
The whole thing is searchable and very easy to navigate. I am really busy this afternoon so have to resist the urge to poke around much more at the moment.
Tuesday, July 1, 2014
Understanding Latin American Politics Textbook
My new book is officially out and I received my copies today. I mentioned it a while ago with some details here. If you're an instructor, go over to Pearson's website and request an exam copy.
According to me, it is the best book written about the topic ever, and likely will never be topped. But that's just me.
Having a book come out is always a great feeling and even more so when it took so long to write.
Writing Drugs & Terrorism in Latin America
I am just finishing revisions of the drugs and terrorism chapter for the 2nd edition of U.S. and Latin American Relations. The tone of the chapter has changed quite a bit, more so than any other chapter, I think, though immigration also shifted. This goes along with not only how my thinking of the topic has changed since the book went into print back in 2007, but also how the Bush and Obama eras are different.
The idea of "terrorism" itself has evolved, as the U.S. is far less obsessed with talking about it in the Latin American context. Bush GWOT included Latin America, and Obama retired the term. Bush played up terrorism quite a lot, and now the Obama administration consistently pushes back on the idea that, for example, Middle Eastern terrorists are setting up shop in the region.
The military obsession has also waned. Yes, there is plenty of military presence in the fight against drug trafficking now and there are serious issues attached to it, but the U.S. push doesn't play the same role it did 7+ years ago (on the current situation in this regard, see Adam Isacson et al's report from September 2013). Instead, I am noting the increased discussion of decriminalization, which was absent (or at least very muted) back then. Latin America pushes back.
There is so much more written on Mexico now than back then, while Colombia has receded. I was all about Colombia when I first wrote the chapter and now had to cut big chunks that are just too dated, while adding more on Mexico and Central America.
In all, U.S.-Latin American relations in this regard (and pretty much every regard) are much improved since the Bush era (certainly not perfect, such as the case of Bolivia). This does not mean we're necessarily any closer to resolving the problems associated with drugs and violence, but it's something.
The idea of "terrorism" itself has evolved, as the U.S. is far less obsessed with talking about it in the Latin American context. Bush GWOT included Latin America, and Obama retired the term. Bush played up terrorism quite a lot, and now the Obama administration consistently pushes back on the idea that, for example, Middle Eastern terrorists are setting up shop in the region.
The military obsession has also waned. Yes, there is plenty of military presence in the fight against drug trafficking now and there are serious issues attached to it, but the U.S. push doesn't play the same role it did 7+ years ago (on the current situation in this regard, see Adam Isacson et al's report from September 2013). Instead, I am noting the increased discussion of decriminalization, which was absent (or at least very muted) back then. Latin America pushes back.
There is so much more written on Mexico now than back then, while Colombia has receded. I was all about Colombia when I first wrote the chapter and now had to cut big chunks that are just too dated, while adding more on Mexico and Central America.
In all, U.S.-Latin American relations in this regard (and pretty much every regard) are much improved since the Bush era (certainly not perfect, such as the case of Bolivia). This does not mean we're necessarily any closer to resolving the problems associated with drugs and violence, but it's something.
Monday, June 16, 2014
U.S. and Latin American Relations writing (part 8)
My last update was a bit more than two weeks ago. I made quite a bit of progress since then. I got in the groove of revision, which was especially necessary in the immigration chapter because so much has happened. In the political economy chapter I noticed a similar dynamic, particularly how I mentioned the FTAA several times as it wasn't yet clear back then (at least not to me!) that it was dead.
Progress (Deadline: August 1, 2014)
Chapter 1 (Theory) - Done
Chapter 2 (Historical) - Done
Chapter 3 (Rise of US Hegemony) - Done
Chapter 4 (Intervention/Good Neighbor) - Done
Chapter 5 (Early Cold War) - Done
Chapter 6 (Cuba Revolution)- Done
Chapter 7 (Communist Threat) - revised; need to polish
Chapter 8 (Challenge to US Hegemony)- writing (28 pages out of ~45) Goal: four pages a week
Chapter 9 (Political Economy)- revised; need to polish
Chapter 10 (Immigration) - revised; need to polish
Chapter 11 (Human Rights) - comments written; need to revise Finish by July 4
Chapter 12 (Drug Trafficking) - starting to write comments Finish by July 23
Chapter 8 writing goals:
May 16 - 12 pages
May 23 - 16 pages
May 30 - 20 pages
June 6 - 24 pages
June 13 - 28 pages
June 20 - 32 pages
June 27 - 36 pages
July 4 - 42 pages
July 11 - 44 pages
July 11-25 - revise and polish
It is June 16 and I've written 29 pages, which means I am right on track (I needed to be at 28 as I started this week).
Progress (Deadline: August 1, 2014)
Chapter 1 (Theory) - Done
Chapter 2 (Historical) - Done
Chapter 3 (Rise of US Hegemony) - Done
Chapter 4 (Intervention/Good Neighbor) - Done
Chapter 5 (Early Cold War) - Done
Chapter 6 (Cuba Revolution)- Done
Chapter 7 (Communist Threat) - revised; need to polish
Chapter 8 (Challenge to US Hegemony)- writing (28 pages out of ~45) Goal: four pages a week
Chapter 9 (Political Economy)- revised; need to polish
Chapter 10 (Immigration) - revised; need to polish
Chapter 11 (Human Rights) - comments written; need to revise Finish by July 4
Chapter 12 (Drug Trafficking) - starting to write comments Finish by July 23
Chapter 8 writing goals:
May 16 - 12 pages
May 23 - 16 pages
May 30 - 20 pages
June 6 - 24 pages
June 13 - 28 pages
June 20 - 32 pages
June 27 - 36 pages
July 4 - 42 pages
July 11 - 44 pages
July 11-25 - revise and polish
It is June 16 and I've written 29 pages, which means I am right on track (I needed to be at 28 as I started this week).
Thursday, June 5, 2014
Academic Productivity Habits
I really like this blog post by Brandon Valeriano at RelationsInternational, where he links to an 6-point article on productivity making its way through the interwebs and says he would do the opposite of every single point. So would I. I also advised people that the most important rule about blogging is to ignore rules.
1. Manage your mood. Your mood is not just generated automatically. You can try to be positive but you also deal with other people and situations that affect it. If you were up all night with a vomiting child and wonder if the stomach bug will hit you in the middle of class, your mood just won't be chipper.
2. Don't check email in the morning. This doesn't work for me. With a cup of coffee and about 15 minutes, I get my day going productively by dealing with immediate emails. If I don't do that, then there are just more emails to do deal with throughout the day. You have to deal with them at some point and I don't see why afternoon is inherently better. Like everyone else, I like to complain about email but it's just not that big a deal to me.
3. Before you try to do it faster, ask whether or not it should be done. This puzzles me. I cannot remember doing anything I didn't need to. Why would I assign myself meaningless tasks? If someone higher up gives me something to do, then by definition I have to do it.
4. Focus is nothing more than eliminating distractions. This is tautological. If you are focusing then you have eliminated distractions, and vice versa. We all define "distraction" differently. I cannot work in silence, for example, and write well when I can break it up with internet forays.
5. Have a personal system. The way this is described seems rather OCD to me. I work well in the morning, for example, but I don't have a routine and I would find a strict routine oppressive. I know some people literally block off time during the day for certain things, which I would not like.
6. Define your goals the night before. Brandon: "This has to be the absolute worst part of the article. Defining your goals before sleep sounds like the best way to have nasty dreams, worry all night, and stay up watching Antiques Roadshow (or is that just me?)." I absolutely turn off work before sleep and normally read something completely unrelated to work.
1. Manage your mood. Your mood is not just generated automatically. You can try to be positive but you also deal with other people and situations that affect it. If you were up all night with a vomiting child and wonder if the stomach bug will hit you in the middle of class, your mood just won't be chipper.
2. Don't check email in the morning. This doesn't work for me. With a cup of coffee and about 15 minutes, I get my day going productively by dealing with immediate emails. If I don't do that, then there are just more emails to do deal with throughout the day. You have to deal with them at some point and I don't see why afternoon is inherently better. Like everyone else, I like to complain about email but it's just not that big a deal to me.
3. Before you try to do it faster, ask whether or not it should be done. This puzzles me. I cannot remember doing anything I didn't need to. Why would I assign myself meaningless tasks? If someone higher up gives me something to do, then by definition I have to do it.
4. Focus is nothing more than eliminating distractions. This is tautological. If you are focusing then you have eliminated distractions, and vice versa. We all define "distraction" differently. I cannot work in silence, for example, and write well when I can break it up with internet forays.
5. Have a personal system. The way this is described seems rather OCD to me. I work well in the morning, for example, but I don't have a routine and I would find a strict routine oppressive. I know some people literally block off time during the day for certain things, which I would not like.
6. Define your goals the night before. Brandon: "This has to be the absolute worst part of the article. Defining your goals before sleep sounds like the best way to have nasty dreams, worry all night, and stay up watching Antiques Roadshow (or is that just me?)." I absolutely turn off work before sleep and normally read something completely unrelated to work.
Friday, May 30, 2014
U.S. and Latin American Relations writing (part 7)
The last time I updated this was three weeks ago. I am behind, though not by a lot. All of the rush of the end of the semester--which is even greater when you're chair--is now done and June should be much more productive.
Chapter 1 (Theory) - Done
Chapter 2 (Historical) - Done
Chapter 3 (Rise of US Hegemony) - Done
Chapter 4 (Intervention/Good Neighbor) - Done
Chapter 5 (Early Cold War) - Done
Chapter 6 (Cuba Revolution)- Done
Chapter 7 (Communist Threat) - have comments done & am adding them
Chapter 8 (Challenge to US Hegemony)- writing (16 pages out of ~45) Four pages a week
Chapter 9 (Political Economy)- have comments but not yet revised Finish by May 28
Chapter 10 (Immigration) - printed and started writing comments Finish by June 16
Chapter 11 (Human Rights) - printed and thinking about all the outdated parts Finish by July 4
Chapter 12 (Drug Trafficking) - printed and thinking about all the outdated parts Finish by July 23
Chapter 9 writing goals:
May 16 - 12 pages
May 23 - 16 pages
May 30 - 20 pages
June 6 - 24 pages
June 13 - 28 pages
June 20 - 32 pages
June 27 - 36 pages
July 4 - 42 pages
July 11 - 44 pages
July 11-25 - revise and polish
It is May 30 and I have written 16 pages, which means I am 4 pages (i.e. one week) behind.
Chapter 1 (Theory) - Done
Chapter 2 (Historical) - Done
Chapter 3 (Rise of US Hegemony) - Done
Chapter 4 (Intervention/Good Neighbor) - Done
Chapter 5 (Early Cold War) - Done
Chapter 6 (Cuba Revolution)- Done
Chapter 7 (Communist Threat) - have comments done & am adding them
Chapter 8 (Challenge to US Hegemony)- writing (16 pages out of ~45) Four pages a week
Chapter 9 (Political Economy)- have comments but not yet revised Finish by May 28
Chapter 10 (Immigration) - printed and started writing comments Finish by June 16
Chapter 11 (Human Rights) - printed and thinking about all the outdated parts Finish by July 4
Chapter 12 (Drug Trafficking) - printed and thinking about all the outdated parts Finish by July 23
Finishing Chapter 7 will not take much time. Typing in the changes to Chapter 9 will take longer because they require more updating. Those were supposed to be done 2 days ago.
Chapter 9 writing goals:
May 16 - 12 pages
May 23 - 16 pages
May 30 - 20 pages
June 6 - 24 pages
June 13 - 28 pages
June 20 - 32 pages
June 27 - 36 pages
July 4 - 42 pages
July 11 - 44 pages
July 11-25 - revise and polish
It is May 30 and I have written 16 pages, which means I am 4 pages (i.e. one week) behind.
Thursday, May 29, 2014
Immigration Chapter Needs Major Updates
"As more Hispanic immigrants and their children gain the right to vote in the United States, it has become clear that neither the Republican nor Democratic parties have an obvious edge. For example, although the Republican Party in California has been a voice for immigrant restriction, many recent Latin American immigrants with strong Catholic backgrounds gravitate toward its conservative social message (209-210)."
--Gregory Weeks, U.S. and Latin American Relations (2008)
Holy cow, talk about a poorly thought out sentence. I am starting work on the immigration chapter for the second edition and just came across it. But it's also a fascinating glimpse into how much has changed since the end of the Bush administration. I am guessing I wrote that sentence around 2006, a time when a conservative Republican president was fighting unsuccessfully--sometimes against conservative Democrats--for immigration reform. Some conservative Republicans were actually trying to hammer out plans that would include legalizing undocumented workers. Members of the RNC argued that Republican voters supported reform. Latinos had voted for Bush in large numbers. I overestimated the strength of those signals.
So there will be some serious rewriting in this chapter.
Friday, May 23, 2014
Gap Between Academia and Policy for Latin America
I was pleased with the roundtable we had at LASA about the disconnect between academia and the policy world with regard to Latin America. It was a lot of fun and I think sparked some great discussion. The panelists were Chris Sabatini, Shannon O'Neil, Bill LeoGrande and Frank Mora.
We did note that many policy makers remain hostile or just indifferent to academia, especially at high levels. As scholars, we can't control that but we can take some of our own steps.
We've made too little progress and the gap remains unbridged to a significant degree. In some ways, political science as a discipline has moved away from policy even as the possible means of dissemination through social media has expanded. For that reason, individuals must be entrepreneurial, knowing they may not receive much (or any) credit toward the goals of tenure, promotion, and merit raises.
Here are some concrete suggestions that came out of the discussion. We covered a lot and this is not exhaustive but it provides a sense of what we (and the audience) were thinking about.
1. Learn to write in different ways. Speak the language. Strip out the jargon and get straight to the point. Side note: this is one way in which The Monkey Cage is a great venue, as it essentially translates academic work into something more accessible.
2. Shop that writing. You can blog, of course, but you can also write op-eds. Plus, you should contact people in thinks tanks and introduce yourself, which can often even be done via Twitter. Write for Americas Quarterly or Foreign Policy. Communicate with reporters and get quoted, which then raises your profile and allows you to get your voice heard, even if just a little bit.
3. Try to exhort a little less. We all have opinions, sometimes very strong, but you need to convey information, not just how much you want a policy changed. Latin Americanists are often tagged as adversarial, which may be true in many policy areas but your voice is stronger if you make your case without too much ideology.
4. Learn the policy process. It is very easy to demand change but recognize the obstacles to policy reform when you're making a case. It is easy for policy makers (or say, staffers who may read these articles and discuss them) to dismiss analyses they believe naive.
5. Be aware of what you don't know. Even if you understand the policy process pretty well, you do not know the inner workings of different parts of the government. Who is in, who is out, what personal differences there are, etc. At least recognize that your policy prescriptions may not even be possible (or at least need more nuance) under given circumstances.
6. Incorporate it into your classes. One great idea (I need to give Shannon O'Neil credit here) is to arrange for policy analysts to Skype into a class and talk to students. Have students write op-eds and policy briefs. I am going to think about all of that as I prepare my Latin American Politics syllabus for the Fall 2014 semester.
It's true that these and other issues are not entirely new. Alexander George in particular had grappled with them years ago. But one point that came up several times is that the difference now is social media. You do not need to go to DC to meet people. In fact, I had not yet met my fellow panelists in person even though I had been in touch with them in various ways over time through blogging, Twitter, and email.
We did note that many policy makers remain hostile or just indifferent to academia, especially at high levels. As scholars, we can't control that but we can take some of our own steps.
We've made too little progress and the gap remains unbridged to a significant degree. In some ways, political science as a discipline has moved away from policy even as the possible means of dissemination through social media has expanded. For that reason, individuals must be entrepreneurial, knowing they may not receive much (or any) credit toward the goals of tenure, promotion, and merit raises.
Here are some concrete suggestions that came out of the discussion. We covered a lot and this is not exhaustive but it provides a sense of what we (and the audience) were thinking about.
1. Learn to write in different ways. Speak the language. Strip out the jargon and get straight to the point. Side note: this is one way in which The Monkey Cage is a great venue, as it essentially translates academic work into something more accessible.
2. Shop that writing. You can blog, of course, but you can also write op-eds. Plus, you should contact people in thinks tanks and introduce yourself, which can often even be done via Twitter. Write for Americas Quarterly or Foreign Policy. Communicate with reporters and get quoted, which then raises your profile and allows you to get your voice heard, even if just a little bit.
3. Try to exhort a little less. We all have opinions, sometimes very strong, but you need to convey information, not just how much you want a policy changed. Latin Americanists are often tagged as adversarial, which may be true in many policy areas but your voice is stronger if you make your case without too much ideology.
4. Learn the policy process. It is very easy to demand change but recognize the obstacles to policy reform when you're making a case. It is easy for policy makers (or say, staffers who may read these articles and discuss them) to dismiss analyses they believe naive.
5. Be aware of what you don't know. Even if you understand the policy process pretty well, you do not know the inner workings of different parts of the government. Who is in, who is out, what personal differences there are, etc. At least recognize that your policy prescriptions may not even be possible (or at least need more nuance) under given circumstances.
6. Incorporate it into your classes. One great idea (I need to give Shannon O'Neil credit here) is to arrange for policy analysts to Skype into a class and talk to students. Have students write op-eds and policy briefs. I am going to think about all of that as I prepare my Latin American Politics syllabus for the Fall 2014 semester.
It's true that these and other issues are not entirely new. Alexander George in particular had grappled with them years ago. But one point that came up several times is that the difference now is social media. You do not need to go to DC to meet people. In fact, I had not yet met my fellow panelists in person even though I had been in touch with them in various ways over time through blogging, Twitter, and email.
Sunday, May 18, 2014
LASA Panel on Academic Relevance
The 2014 meeting of the Latin American Studies Association is coming right up in Chicago. I organized a roundtable to discuss the academia/policy divide, which is getting a lot of attention but no one has examined it specifically for U.S.-Latin American relations.
As an academic who is very interested in policy, this matters a lot to me. So I chose a group of people who are similarly interested but from different vantage points. So we have combinations of former policy makers/staffers who are now academics, people who publish on U.S.-Latin American relations, people who work in high-profile think tanks, etc. What can/should academics do now and into the future to avoid policy irrelevance? What does that even mean?
As you might guess, given what I write about on this blog and in my publications I'm really looking forward to the discussion. Join us if you can.
As an academic who is very interested in policy, this matters a lot to me. So I chose a group of people who are similarly interested but from different vantage points. So we have combinations of former policy makers/staffers who are now academics, people who publish on U.S.-Latin American relations, people who work in high-profile think tanks, etc. What can/should academics do now and into the future to avoid policy irrelevance? What does that even mean?
As you might guess, given what I write about on this blog and in my publications I'm really looking forward to the discussion. Join us if you can.
Thursday, May 15, 2014
Universities and Social Media
The Kansas Board of Regents made a decision on its social media policy and it's messed up:
What constitutes "the best interests of the university"? I find that creepy because it can mean anything. That you can be fired if you criticize a corporate sponsor of the university, for example? Or write something that annoys leaders in the state legislature, who make funding decisions? Basically, yes:
We're in a profession that revolves around thinking, writing, and conveying. The more you impose restrictions on that--beyond the normal and reasonable restrictions on speech that apply to everyone--the more you block that process and warp it. I hope very much that "best interest of the university" part is not invoked and not copied elsewhere.
The new policy says that faculty and staff of the state's six universities, 19 community colleges and six technical colleges may not say anything on social media that would incite violence, disclose confidential student information or release protected data. But it also says staffers are barred from saying anything "contrary to the best interests of the university."
What constitutes "the best interests of the university"? I find that creepy because it can mean anything. That you can be fired if you criticize a corporate sponsor of the university, for example? Or write something that annoys leaders in the state legislature, who make funding decisions? Basically, yes:
The chief executive officer of a state university has the authority to suspend, dismiss or terminate from employment any faculty or staff member who makes improper use of social media. "Social media" means any facility for online publication and commentary, including but not limited to blogs, wikis, and social networking sites such as Facebook, LinkedIn, Twitter, Flickr, and YouTube.I use Twitter and Blogger daily and although I don't think anything I write would fall under this category, maybe I am wrong and I could get suspended for pointing out what I believe to be flawed logic with the state legislature's approach to education funding or, heaven forbid, for giving the impression that UNC Charlotte roots for the San Diego Padres.
We're in a profession that revolves around thinking, writing, and conveying. The more you impose restrictions on that--beyond the normal and reasonable restrictions on speech that apply to everyone--the more you block that process and warp it. I hope very much that "best interest of the university" part is not invoked and not copied elsewhere.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)