--- Forwarded Message from "David Pankratz" <[log in to unmask]> ---

>Date: Fri, 04 Jun 1999 14:40:44 -0500
>From: "David Pankratz" <[log in to unmask]>
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: #5032.3 Position Announcement (Re-Posting) (!) -Reply

It was good to hear others' thoughts on this issue. I especially like
the question, rephrased,  "Have you learned anything really meaningful
in your position lately." If not,  it certainly makes one wonder  how
one
is going to gain the skills required on many of these "wish lists"
disguised as position descriptions.  It also makes me think that we
have to make it clear to administrators that professional development
is key to our jobs. We must have ways to update our skills, otherwise
operations will deteriorate gradually but perceptibly.  On he other
hand, in my understanding of what a "lab director", i.e., a
facilitator of technology for both students and faculty, does, this
person cannot be a technical expert in all relevant software
applications, etc. That would be missing the point.  A distinction
should be made between an educational manager/facilitator and a
techie. Both are needed. It appears to me that many of the newer job
descriptions are trying to combine both into one. I wonder what the
success rate will be. Finally, I agree with you, Virginia, that many
of us who have experience in both areas, to varying degrees, are in
more demand than we may be aware.  In other words, maybe we should see
our strengths as opposed to our weaknesses, which is sometimes hard
for educators.

David Pankratz
Loyola University Chicago


>>> LLTI-Editor <[log in to unmask]> 06/01 3:39 pm >>>
--- Forwarded Message from Virginia Lewis <[log in to unmask]> ---

>Date: Fri, 28 May 1999 19:02:46 -0500
>From: Virginia Lewis <[log in to unmask]>
>Reply-To: [log in to unmask]
>To: Language Learning and Technology International Information Forum
<[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: Re: #5032.1 Position Announcement (Re-Posting) (!)
>References: <[log in to unmask]>

------------------
David, you raise some interesting questions.  Certainly it seems to me
that
we all need to rethink where we should be focusing or refocusing our
efforts.  Despite the list of requirements for this particular
position, I
would argue that it is probably more focused and - even more realistic
(!)
than most *lab director* positions are.  Its problem, of course, is
that it
is grant funded - and administrations have a long history in our field
of
not recognizing the long-term nature of this kind of endeavor.  So, of
course, it is a risk (that meaningful long-term funding will be
forthcoming).  Nevertheless, I would argue that all of us are "at
risk" if
we don't take a very proactive role in structuring our profession and
its
demands.   I do a fair amount of formal and informal consulting - and
I've
also been in the process of rethinking ("reinventing") myself since I
decided to leave Southwestern (and have been on the market).  From my
own
experience, I can tell you that 1) people are not getting the kinds
and
numbers of applicants that they did in the "old days" (that means
we're
probably doing something *right* as a profession - we're saying
"thanks,
but I pass"); 2) many of us are leaving the profession as
narrowly-defined
- and that, in many cases, with a great deal of pain - since we love
and
are committed to language study; and 3) (in my humble opinion) what
you
might derive from numbers one and two - we're in more of a "seller's
market" than many of you might realize.  On the other hand, I think we
do
need to make sure we keep up-to-date on the emerging technologies -
but
that brings back many of the problems of lab director positions - who
has
time to*do* that (at least in depth), when we're wearing all those
other
hats?  If we're lucky, we have technical staff to actually do the
scripting
(but most of us don't!) and can learn Java, for example, with broad
strokes.  But most lab directors just don't have time to do
*significant*
development themselves - and that can be a major frustration.  I've
asked
myself in my "rethinking" process - have you been able to learn
*meaningful* new things in your last position?  Two positions ago I
could
answer overwhelmingly yes (in large part due to the wonderful academic
computing staff at Haverford which made me feel a part of what they
were
doing); in my last position, the answer was overwhelmingly "no."
(Lots of
reasons I won't go into - but realizing that made me stop and think
and
think again and again and again. . .)  That epiphany has led to some
insecurity (leaving one position before being sure what the next one
would
be) - but also to a great deal of personal satisfaction.  While I'm
deciding where I am going to go next, I've had time to dig into (in
*depth*
for a change) Javascript and Java and all the other things that we're
going
to have to know or become extinct.  But that doesn't mean we should
cave in
to yet one more unrealistic demand.

I'd encourage you all to start a conversation - maybe now on LLTI -
and in
person at IALL - about all this - again - and in earnest.  I'd also
encourage you to "just say no" to positions which are abusive (in
terms of
demands, salaries, professional status, etc.).  But don't just ignore
them
- *respond* to them - and, as constructively as you can, try to
educate
those "offering" the abuse.  But we as a profession have to say -
somehow -
"it stops here!"  So how do we do that?  (I'd really be interested in
how
many of *you* can say honestly: "I have a great position!"  If you do,
I
bet you "grew your own institution"  If so, my hat - or maybe *all* my
former hats *are* - is off to you!).

In any case, I know we have this conversation periodically - but maybe
it's
time to start it again?

Virginia




LLTI-Editor wrote:

> --- Forwarded Message from "David Pankratz" <[log in to unmask]>
---
>
> >Date: Thu, 27 May 1999 14:25:20 -0500
> >From: "David Pankratz" <[log in to unmask]>
> >To: [log in to unmask]
> >Subject: #5032 Position Announcement (Re-Posting) -Reply
>
> At the risk of going out on a rather long limb here, my curiosity is
> seriously aroused about the qualifications required for this
position
> versus the likelihood that there are people out there with those
> qualifications who are looking for work.
>
> While reading through the expectations, I was thinking how ambitious
> and challenging this position would be (knowledge of language
> pedagogy, advising faculty, conducting technical workshops,
installing
> software, program evaluation, etc.), and then I got to this part:
>
> "...[the applicant] will also be familiar with emerging
instructional
> technology on both Mac and DOS/Windows platforms. Expertise in low
to
> high level authoring systems (e.g. Macromedia's Authorware and
> Director programs, X-Media Engine Templates, Libra or SuperMacLang)
as
> well as a good grasp on web-development (HTML, Javascript, knowledge
> of common editors like PageMill, Netscape Composer, or Claris Home
> Page) is expected."
>
> Wow. I can imagine that many potential applicants might be
intimidated
> by the quite diverse level of  "expertise" required in all of the
> computer platforms and applications listed. Many of the people I
know
> who are successful in this field came from a foreign
> language/linguistics/language pedagogy background, and they have
> learned technology--including computer technology--as they go. I
> wonder if a substantial change is taking place. Is the "profession"
> expecting such a high level of technical expertise for a position
that
> may not even be permanent?
>
> Just some thoughts--and not meant to be critical, merely
inquisitive.
> The work sounds fascinating, but I am wondering how others who read
> this list react to this position announcement.  (Am I the only one
who
> is feeling like maybe I should sign up for a Memorial Day Weekend
Java
> course?...)
>
> David Pankratz
> Loyola University Chicago

--
Virginia L. Lewis
Blustery Day Productions:
Real Teaching with Virtual Technologies
1914 Cervin Blvd.
Austin, TX 78728
512-989-1534
[log in to unmask]