I think I had some of the fast trackers for profs when I was in university. Half my professors couldn't teach worth ****.
That is truly something else isn't it? The teacher education profs. had a hard time winning over secondary and elementary teachers in regards to proper teaching methods because they themselves did such a horrid job at motivating, showing enthusiasm in teaching, etc. Perhaps that is why GAs tend to do the teaching at large universities? The profs. don't want to be distrurbed from their precious book in order to teach a bunch of snot-nosed freshmen a survey course.
No way I can tolerate specializing in ESL. I'm just doing my job now for money, and I don't find it very interesting. Actually that's a lie. I teach elementary school, and working with kids is a total riot, and I enjoy that a lot.
Teaching is truly something else. I enjoy the challenge and the sense of accomplishment it gives just can't be matched. I can't see myself filing insurance claims or something like that, the *meaning* just wouldn't be there for me, though I'm not implying that insurance claims adjustors have no meaning in their lives.
But, it is not very intellectual, and I would rather up the intellect.
I understand this feeling. When you are teaching young people, it's similar to an all-star baseball player playing t-ball. And to think, some people play intellectual t-ball for thirty years or more. I would say that the key to partially solving this problem, at least it solves it for many people, would be to find an avenue to let this desire for a brainy challenge to come out. Perhaps teaching a college night class? That was a very good outlet for me. You should seriously consider it.
I'm really interested in ecology, literature, truth, beauty, environment, eco-criticism, nature writing, and stuff in that area.
Some of the more interesting works out there is through independent research.
Ken Wilber is a great example of accomplishing a lot without university support. If you wanted to do something ever edgy or "out there," you would have a hard time getting kudos from your colleagues in a departmental setting.
I can't really stand Spenser and Pope and that sort of crowd all that much, but Thoreau, Melville, and similar are okay. The Romantics are kind of my cut off point. I would research and teach in my areas of interest for free. Pay would be nice, though. Basically I want a job that corresponds to my hobby
.
The Rape of the Lock and
The Educator are some of the most amusing poems that Pope every produced. Given his attitude though, I would've punched his lights out had I ever met him. Gotta love Thoreau and the trascendentalists, I can't get enough of their works. As for the bolded part that I created, that would be teaching at the university level? I agree that would be perhaps the best of both worlds. However, it is not a bowl of cherries either. The increasing hiring of adjuncts, administrators, tight budgets, the "publish or perish" minset, and did I mention administrators? I have known some college professors who were miserable. I'm not certain what to attribute it to, but I have some theories.
My only worry now is finding an area of specialization that is in demand. That's why I'm keen to get into journals. Actually, I've found most of my brilliant ideas recently have already been done, and not recently. I thought I struck intellectual gold and truth when I was doing my BA, and then realized it was just a re-do of Atwood and Palahniuk. Recently I've been obsessed with wolves in literature, but I think Barry Lopez did a definitive study. Wilderness was an area I thought I had unique ideas about, but Roderick Nash wrote the book I could have written about forty years ago. These are widely published authors, not academic researchers.
Maybe I have to chill out.
It's good to have in your mind what you would like to research. The specifics will come at the appropriate time. Perhaps a critique of Nash and his observations? A multicultural critiuqe of the Euro-dominant oppressive desire to crush nature as espoused by Nash?
Just kidding-but I think you know what I'm getting at in a round about way here.