Media, Culture, Technology

Month: September 2015

Shaping Sound, Shaping Minds

I have been a mighty admirer of the dance scene especially since I started dancing when I was young and haven’t stopped since. In my opinion, So You Think You Can Dance is one of the greatest television series that has been invented. They attract many talents who audition and get challenged by the show, not only in their genre, but in other genres too. The show first debuted in 2005 and is on their 12th season currently.

In particular, I’ve admired Nick Lazzarini and Travis Wall, the winner of season 1 and runner-up of season 2 respectively. They are both contemporary dancers and have since found fulfilling careers in the world of dance. Just recently in 2012, Wall and Lazzarini founded their own dance company Shaping Sound with Teddy Forance and Kyle Robinson. They have recruited wonderful talents who have helped make their national tours a reality.

The four founders had heard many of their dancer friends speak about the lack of opportunities and career prospects that they decided to build their own company. The four mainly choreograph and envision the production, while the members audition and strive to perfect their artistry. Their motto of “Dance Reimagined” is highly pertinent to this set of dancers because Wall has been growing his reputation of having creative choreographies that blossom into new boundaries of contemporary dance. In the past week, Wall won an Emmy for Outstanding Choreography.

Their first tour was last year and concluded their second this past February. It was with luck that they were in Philadelphia in that last stretch. Although it was on a Wednesday night, I had made up my mind months prior that I would not miss this concert. This was probably one of the best decisions I have made in my life. The passion, commitment, and energy that the dancers had on stage transcended to the audience, whether or not they were dancers themselves. Overall, the show was very well-thought out and the visuals were stunning. Each piece was performed to perfection and the audience could not have gotten more for their buck.

I have two favorite pieces from the show. The first was the “Sing Sing Sing” item before intermission. There is probably a 99% chance that every tap dancer has tapped to this song. It was a pleasant surprise that the company had such a classic tune in their line-up. However, they presented this as a jazz piece, which was a refreshing change from the more modern takes that preceded it. As the company’s main focus is contemporary, the pieces before were more interpretative and emotive. This item stood out because of the energy and entertainment value that was injected into it. The quick and clean execution of the steps built up an enormous ball of energy that exploded on stage and washed over the audience. They were one with each other and with the music. The passion they had for dance was eminent and infectious. I felt a surge of energy through my veins as they laid out their hearts for all to see. The audience managed to contain the joyfulness for the length of the piece, but erupted in applause and cheers at the end of the item. I will never forget that moment, where no matter your race, class, gender, age, or even dance knowledge, you feel part of a shared emotional experience. It was a uniting force and in that moment I knew that I made the right decision to be there.

Wall has been asked back to So You Think You Can Dance as a guest judge, choreographer, all-star cast member, and now team captain. As a new feature for the upcoming season, he is the mentor for the stage performers. It took the producers awhile, but Lazzarini too joined the all-star cast in season 11. Wall has grown his reputation as reinventing an approach to dance. His movements flow with the music and this connection is undeniable as he receives praise from the judges, public, and fellow peers. It was no surprise that he would choreograph to another classic, “Bohemian Rhapsody” by Queen. This was another one of my favorites of the night. It featured the guys of the company. At one point in the choreography, the guys stepped into a spotlight each. This lined them up horizontally across the stage as the lights flickered and highlighted each member to guide the viewer’s attention. The mastery of technique and expression of mischief was a tease for the audience. Lazzarini can be flamboyant, and his character definitely shone in this dance when he snapped his fingers back and forth, a much more simpler set of counts that was a pleasant addition to the technically difficult piece. The lighting and timing of the dancers and tech-people amalgamated perfectly and the audience was engaged through it. The visuals brought together personality, dance, and emotions. I could watch it many times over and still fall in love with it each time.

Shaping Sound‘s motto is “Dance Reimagined,” which they accomplished with ease. I have been so fortunate to have experienced their artistry. They were truly meticulous with the production to present wholesome and meaty performances, leaving no detail behind. The audience members buzzed excitedly after the show concluded and that was heartening to hear others acknowledge the brilliance of the production. As a dancer myself, I have been behind the scenes and on stage, which only fuels my knowledge and admiration that dancers are hard workers who constantly strive to better themselves. These are many qualities that I respect and hope to emulate. Dance is not just a leisure activity, but a lifestyle.

The Dickinson Film Club was founded last year by Charlie Leitner ’15, and is still in its infancy as an organization, but that doesn’t mean it hasn’t taken the campus by storm by putting out spectacularly hilarious shorts (though I may be a little biased, seeing as I am the current President of the organization). The Club, which is devoted to creating high quality video content, first got recognition at the end of this past spring semester when they released their “This is Dickinson” videos parodying the popular SportsCenter commercials.

Now that school is back in session, the club is looking to expand on the incredible reception the campus gave them in the spring. This evening the group released their newest installment in the “This is Dickinson” series. It can be viewed above and is also available on YouTube. You can also “like” the Dickinson Film Club on Facebook. And don’t forget to subscribe on to the club’s YouTube channel to see future videos.

If you wish to get involved with the Dickinson Film Club, send me an email at clausont@dickinson.edu.

The Original Dragon Lady

Do you remember growing up, how your mother would always say, “Don’t judge a book by its cover”? Of course, she was referring to that weird lab partner you were always complaining about, but the principle has much broader applicability, because when I picked up Get Off The Dragon, I literally judged the book by its cover. And I’m going to be honest and say I was less than thrilled to have to read it for my Sword and Sorcery class. I have never been one to read fantasy fiction for pleasure or even consider reading science fiction work. I find the make-believe, magic, dragons and whatever else you want to classify as “fantasy” completely boring and unrealistic. But, after reading Get Off The Dragon, I have to give Anne McCaffrey serious props. The book was well written and not too long, and although many would classify her writing in the fantasy realm, I would say it’s more futuristic than anything, which helped make it more interesting to read. Many of the stories in this collection are believable, and if they aren’t, they are too entertaining to care! So, I’ll admit I was wrong to judge her book by the cover, but if I’m being honest, the book’s cover cover isn’t particularly representative of the content anyway.

Let’s start with the cover art. We have, a ferocious dragon breaking through the fragile walls of its shell, with a sickly boy covered in bloody bandages stumbling in the background. There are no signs of females or horsemen, or unicorns for that matter, which seems strange considering the title of the book is Get Off The Unicorn. Originally, Anne McCaffrey planned to title her book Get Of The Unicorn, meaning the offspring of a particular animal. In her introduction, she informs her readers that the mistake “although it fits most of the stories if you know the old tale about unicorn-bait, comes from a misprint in the Ballantine roster of unfilled contracts.” The publishing company, Ballantine, had accidentally printed her book with the wrong title, and rather than changing it, she just went with it.

Interestingly, the two titles appear to contradict themselves. While Get Off the Unicorn hints at the idea of removing oneself from the mythical creature, Get Of The Unicorn refers to the continuation of the species through reproduction. A contrasting parallel is drawn by this mistake, but one has to wonder, what is the symbolism behind the “unicorn” McCaffrey references? Why a unicorn? There are literally no unicorns in any of the stories in this collection, so why title it that? Traditionally, unicorns have appeared as a symbol of chastity and an emblem of God, embodying a sense of mystery and divinity. They are usually white, which hints at their innocence and perfection, as well as their purity and virginity. When Get Off The Unicorn was being published in the 1970’s, Robert E. Howard’s Conan stories were extremely popular in the sword and sorcery genre, depicting images of masculinity, grit, and bloodshed. Perhaps McCaffrey was trying to shift the focus and content of current fantasy /science fictions books from blood and gore to a gentler world with humanistic and relatable content? Being a female writer, it could also be that she wanted to create a gender-friendly fantasy world, one without the hypermasculinity that was so common in Howard’s books.

Published in 1977, at the height of the sword and sorcery craze, Get Off The Unicorn is a collection of short stories, most of which were previously published in science fiction magazines and fantasy anthologies. Many would also later come to be incorporated into larger fictional projects. “Lady in the Tower,” first published in a 1952 issue of The Magazine of Fantasy and Science Fiction, is one of McCaffrey’s earliest stories. After its publication in Get Off the Unicorn, she would return to it as the basis for her 1990 novel The Rowan, the first book in a continued series about telepathy, psycho-kinesis, and other psychic talents. “The Smallest Dragonboy,” a standalone story originally published in Science Fiction Tales in 1973 and again in 1977 in Creatures of the Cosmos,  later became part of the McCaffrey’s famous and long-running Dragonriders of Pern series (consisting of more than twenty-two books!) in a collection titled A Gift of Dragons in 2002.

GetOffTheUnicorn

An Author at the Top of Her Game

Aesthetically, Get Off The Unicorn looks grungy. The cover art isn’t particularly captivating and, as I’ve noted above, has no connection to the title. The misprint makes it clear that the book was significantly less important than McCaffrey’s other works. Why then did Ballantine publish it in the first place? Interestingly, McCaffrey actually acknowledges the book’s insignificance. In her introduction she writes, “Most of you kind people who are buying this volume will have done so because of the author’s name on the cover. I say this with due modesty because, Gentle Reader, you would certainly not choose to buy a book of short stories unless you liked other work by the author.”

When Get Off The Unicorn was published, McCaffrey had completed and published many different books and stories, as well as received a number of prestigious awards including the Best Novella Nebula award for Dragon Rider in 1968 and the E.E. “Doc” Smith Award for Imaginative Fiction award in 1976. By the time Get Off The Unicorn was published and available to the public, McCaffrey was a big deal in the science fiction/fantasy world. Being one of the first female writers taken seriously in this genre, readers admired her for her different approach to fantasy fiction writing. Rather than presenting her readers with archaic language, masculine heroes, and graphic violence as writers like Howard and L. Sprague de Camp did in Conan, McCaffrey considered her work more science fiction than fantasy, and tried to make it appealing to readers of all sexes and ages.

She believed dragons had a universal appeal, one that was not limited by gender, the color of one’s skin, or one’s economic status in society. McCaffrey’s dragons were the most notable elements in her books.  She made her dragons so realistic through the enormous amount of background information she created for her readers, including a history of how the dragons came to be, descriptions of their eating habits, accounts of their interactions with humans, information about their emotions and psychological development, and examinations of their psychic abilities. Pern was a world where humans and dragons lived together in harmony and actually needed one another to survive. McCaffrey set out to subvert both the clichés associated with dragons from old European folklore as well as the negative slant given to the creatures by modern fantasy fiction. Her dragons are entirely friendly to humans and are not viewed as magical creatures, but rather as members of society. McCaffrey’s dedication to the creation of her dragons helped the popularity of her stories take off.

From her many popular books, a wide franchise of Pern merchandise was born. People could not get enough of the world of Pern. In the late 1980’s, a substantial amount of companion books were created using McCaffrey’s fantasy world of Pern. In the 1990’s the first graphic novel was published called DragonFlight. In addition to these prodcuts, there was original music, a television series, film adaptions, and several video and board games. So, if you were like me, wondering whether Anne McCaffrey and her books were actually legit, it’s pretty obvious that people loved her writing.

What’s happening in the World?

In Get Off the Unicorn, McCaffrey organizes the short stories into different sections, each starting with an introduction explaining why she wrote that particular story, if there are any important elements the audience should be aware of, and basically how she feels about her own work. She explains, for instance, that some of the stories were aimed at a younger audience, which is why she focuses on issues that young people can relate to: fashion, romance, education, identity, and family. These issues, which I definitely experienced as a teenager and am still experiencing as a young adult, are ones that enabled me to relate to the characters in the short story “Daughter.” She also notes in the story’s introduction, “I also had enough homosexual male friends–even before the Gay Liberation developed–who were bitter they could not adopt children because of their sexual preferences. I have never felt capable of writing a full-length novel about this situation as it should be written” (59). Her stories are not literally about the lives of gay men, but she presents stories that focus on the struggle of gender roles in society and how they affect the lives of her characters, similar to what gay men and other individuals not conforming to the norms of society were experiencing during the time this story was being written.

“Daughter” concerns twins Nick and Nora, who live in a futuristic world built on the belief that every individual contributes to society in some way, whether it be farming, computer programming, animal husbandry, or simply staying at home. This complex system keeps structure within this world through both gender roles and where people place during their “educational advancement” exams. This exam determines what a person is good at, and helps that person continue his or her education on that subject when at the university. Nora, who hates being forced to abide by these ridiculous societal rules makes a deal to help Nick with his duties if he finishes hers. Nick is pleased with this idea, since he isn’t good at farming anyway. Unfortunately, her Father discovers their secret when Nick accidentally plants turnips on his family’s farm, the Fenn Farm Complex, a foolish mistake, especially for a boy who is born to be a Fenn farmer. This story focuses on issues of family unity as well as identity acceptance.

In “Dull Drums,” we follow Nora, who greatly succeeds in her Educational Advancement, to university where she studies special Cybernetics, one of the most prestigious programs offered to qualified students. Nora’s experience at university focuses on issues of self-acceptance and romantic relationships. Due to her gender, she was mistreated and isolated at university and struggled with her identity. The underlying themes of both stories are ones that reflect real world issues occurring during the time McCaffrey was writing them, as well as today. Individuals struggling with their identity, either sexually or not, found comfort reading McCaffrey’s books. The fantasy aspects of her books are an escape from reality, while the realistic issues and storylines make them relatable and believable.

Pern Museum

An Ode to Anne McCaffrey…and Dragons

Unfortunately, Anne McCaffrey passed away in November of 2011. Seeing how popular she was in the science-fiction world, I decided to do some research on her fans and how they handled her death, and let me tell you, her fans were heartbroken. Many felt close to McCaffrey due to her books and claimed that her work changed their lives for the better.

The Pern Museum & Archives, created by Hans van de Boom, caught my eye immediately. Not only is it an extremely well-organized site, but also you can tell that this guy really loved Anne McCaffrey. The website is set up like an actual museum. Different links lead you to different sites, focusing on many of the different elements exhibited in her books. There is the Dragon Room, devoted to all things dragons: Dragon art, McCaffrey’s inspiration for dragons, their relationship with humans, and fans’ perceptions of dragons. The Map Room has every map of Pern every created during McCaffrey’s lifetime. The Art Gallery displays official cover art from her books and fan art. I could keep going, but trust me, once you’re in this site you are in it for the long run. He even has a page devoted to character bloodlines from her stories.

In 2013, McCaffrey’s son, Todd, wrote and published Dragonwriter: A Tribute to Anne McCaffrey and Pern, a collection of memories and stories about his beloved mother and author, along with insights into her world of writing. Dragonwriter: A Tribute to Anne McCaffrey and Pern was the thing to buy if you loved McCaffrey’s work. After reading a chapter in the collection that consisted of fan appreciation, it became vey clear that McCaffrey’s stories brought people together. Her works encouraged millions to create fan sites and share their own work with each other.

While McCaffrey was the cause of an eruption of fan-based activity, she also created fan-fiction policies, which her fans respectfully followed. Her fans were not allowed to publish any work that involved white dragons or canonical characters. There were to be no plot crossovers, and all fan magazines were to be approved by Anne herself. She also prohibited any fan from creating a pornographic site based on her literary world of Pern (that would have been pretty interesting right?).

It’s obvious that McCaffrey’s work touched the lives of millions during her lifetime and today continues to affect the lives of her admirers. So, was I wrong to judge Get Off The Unicorn when I first picked it up? Is this book, and her other novels, meant to be collecting dust on shelves, or is it a beacon of hope for some dragon-loving individual just waiting to be read? If you’re like me, I heavily judged her work and I believed the book to be of little importance. After learning more about her life and how her work has changed the science fiction world, affected the lives of her readers, and is still very popular today, it’s pretty her work deserves credit.

 

Between American Comics and Hollywood

During the summer months, Dickinson College’s campus is largely uninhabited, save for a small collection of staff members, faculty, and students. So when folks who saw me at the college then asked me to explain why I chose to spend my vacation from the academic halls and the library—where I exhausted countless hours studying, writing papers, and snacking on Kashi granola bars and Chobani yogurt cups (I admit that I am among the few who survives without caffeine)—back in those spaces, you might imagine, reader, that I felt motivated to offer some spectacular response. To satisfy most inquiries, saying very plainly “I’m doing research on comic books” was an exciting enough phrase.

In the presence of interrogators who possessed stronger senses of doubt, though, I needed to elaborate in order to show them that research on comics is a real thing; “Greg Steirer, a professor in the English department who taught of few of the classes I have taken, is writing a book with Alisa Perren, a professor at University of Texas at Austin, about the relationships between Hollywood studios and American comic book companies,” I would start.

“What got you interested in that topic?” one questioner asked at some point.

“I haven’t read many comic books and generally enjoy films, but what interests me most is my professor’s approach: he intends to move away from looking at the language, be it words or images, of comics and focus on how they function as products of industry: titles and symbols are trademarks, characters are copyrighted properties, and markets change as printing and film technology becomes more sophisticated,” I typically responded.

“Oh, so you won’t be comparing stories to their adaptations?” another interrogator asked.

“Only if the differences revealed through that kind of comparison affect the legal actions carried out by a company or studio, the money earned by comics artists and directors, producers, etc., adaptations for television, spin-offs, or the promotions and selling of ancillary products like toys, clothing, DVDs, and video games,” I have replied.

“You know, I have not thought about it much before now, but I have noticed a ton of comics-related things around within the last few years. I can see how you could learn a lot using that kind of approach,” the freshly convinced admitted.

Though I experienced several a-ha moments of my own as I was working on my project, many of them were similar to ones I witnessed others having: there existed this shared notion that comic books as well as films and merchandise inspired by comics have been a part of American popular culture for a while, yet the fact that this phenomenon would be examined in academia is generally surprising.

“Where Did You Begin?”

My first task was to familiarize myself with the terms in use within the works that discuss comic books. Effective research addresses the basis of knowledge about a topic or field that is maintained by a particular academic community before covering new ground, by using either traditional methodologies to add information to that basis or by suggesting that different tools be implemented to expand the breadth of the topic. To do this, I looked to two texts—Jean-Paul Gabilliet’s Of Comics and Men: A Cultural History of American Comic Books (2013) and Sean Howe’s Marvel Comics: The Untold Story (2012)—that Professor Steirer assigned to me in order to gain a better sense of the history of comics as a medium and some of the prominent comic book artists who helped keep the art form alive (with some attention to its place within film, television, and other entertainment industries). Gabilliet’s book offers a comprehensive, yet not exhaustive, description of the birth and evolution of comics, highlighting different eras in which comic books were marked as pure entertainment, censored for being detrimental to the lives of American youth, hailed as art, and acknowledged as forums for ideological agendas.

Howe’s book focuses on the story of the founding and growth of Marvel Comics, one of the largest comic book companies to date, describing the artists, writers, corporate heads, organizations, and families involved in the creation of iconic characters, the most popular of whom are superheroes like Spiderman, Iron Man, Elektra, the Fantastic Four, Captain America, and the Incredible Hulk. Using personal interviews, recorded conversations, letters, and hearsay, Howe presents the company’s moments of decline and extreme commercial success during the Golden (late 1930s to the early 1950s), the Silver (late 1950s to around 1970), the Bronze (1970 to 1985), and portions of the Modern Ages (1985 to the present) of American comics. It is during this latter phase of time that comic book companies in the United States begin to integrate with Hollywood studios in order to build franchises around popular characters that inspire the development of ancillary products and allow both industries to thrive.

While I was reading through those books, Professor Steirer also shared with me his essay “The State of Comics Scholarship: Comics Studies and Disciplinarity,” in which argued that there is no established academic community for comics scholars and hence little opportunity for debate about what methodologies are to become standard and what theoretical direction ought to be taken within comics studies. He goes on to say that most of the research produced about comics either presents facts about the medium or puts forth critiques about the language within comics, their implicit ideological pretenses, authorship, the medium’s effect on readers (i.e. fan culture, social studies on children), and the comic book’s place as a commercial entity.

As a result of the prevalence of these kinds of isolated analyses, “comics studies” is often grouped together with traditional academic fields like literary studies, culture and media studies, and American studies rather than treated as its own discipline. Without any formal disciplinarity attributed to itself by comics scholars, research on comics does not have its own institutional locus. The solution to this lack of administrative organization and clarity of objective that Steirer offers redirects scholars’ attention to the fact that comic books were first printed to satisfy one goal: to earn money and continue selling products. Companies like Marvel, DC Comics, Image Comics, and Dark Horse have helped turn comics into a fully-fledged and continuously expanding industry. What is more, the Modern Age of American comics would likely have already ended and comics would largely be obscure by now if most comic book publishers did not combine forces with Hollywood studios such as Warner Bros., Sony, Disney, 20th Century Fox, and Universal Pictures, among others.

Both comic book companies and film studios in the United States now share the more sophisticated goal of mass-producing popular and accessible fare that is franchise-able. Thus, Professor Steirer identifies the industrial approach to the study of comics as the most productive mode of analysis on the subject of comic books because of their relationship to issues like production, marketing, consumption practices, and intellectual property law and because of the success of this approach in film and media studies. He does reference some examples of comics scholarship that explore texts through this lens, but he explains that these few pieces exist in the margins of an already marginalized scholarly space.

“What’s in the ‘doing’? What were you looking for?”

After I had finished reading through the basis of knowledge on comic books and comics studies, I was better equipped to search for information directly relevant to Professor Steirer and Professor Perren’s book. Since industry-oriented scholarship on comic books is not a common approach, the sources of information about deals between publishers and studios, legal battles over the copyrights on a particular character or name, and advertising techniques used to promote comics, movies, and ancillary products is buried, so to speak, in non-scholarly articles, reports, and databases. I was tasked with the job of searching through the digital archives of the trade magazine (a general resource for news targeted toward people working in a particular industry) known as Variety, which publishes articles about issues related to Hollywood. I sifted through roughly a thousand separate pieces using search terms like “Marvel Comics,” “Avengers movies,” “Batman,” and “comics and television” in order to find reports that could give Professors Steirer and Perren a greater sense of how issues within these industries are handled tonally in comparison to legal documents and other online forums that mention comic books, movies inspired by comics, or the individuals involved in the processes that maintain these industries’ activity and influence their success. I compiled these writings into a digital annotated bibliography that can be viewed at any point of the book project’s development. Currently, there are over 300 applicable entries listed and summarized.

“What have you gained from this experience and where do you go next?”

Professor Steirer and Professor Perren’s book is scheduled to be published a few years from now, so the work I completed for them was rather simple compared to the work that is going to need to be done at the later stages of the project. However, Professor Steirer and I have discussed the prospect of our picking up where I left off next year. Aside from the large amount of knowledge I have learned this past summer, I have discovered an interest in research and at the moment have not ruled it out among my post-graduation goals. Also, as a student who now has worked and studied using both techniques typically utilized in literary studies and those that are more unconventional, like looking at the commercial or industrial issues, I have become much more aware of and sensitive to what common words like “book,” “art,” “study,” and “American” can mean.

photo (2)

Interview with Patricia Thomas

Patricia Thomas is a Lead Educational Adviser for the Young Scholars Program at the Jack Kent Cooke Foundation. Before joining Jack Kent Cooke, she taught college courses in education and trained K-12 teachers to serve students with a variety of needs, background, and interests. She has also worked as a foreign language instructor and assistant teacher in gifted and enrichment education at both public and private schools.

BROOKE: To start off, can you tell me a little bit about your educational background and what degrees you got in undergrad and how you got to where you are?

PATRICIA: Sure. I was a foreign language major as an undergraduate student. I’d had a passion for French and Spanish all through high school—and actually earlier than that for French. So I majored in French and Spanish and minored in Education and I got my teaching certificate at Wake Forest University in North Carolina. Then I went to Teachers College, the graduate education school at Columbia University, and first I did a Master’s Degree in general Curriculum and Teaching and then I did a Masters of Education in Curriculum and Teaching but with a specialization in Urban and Multicultural Education. I taught for a while while I was there, and then I went to Emory University for my doctoral program, where I got a Ph.D. in Educational Studies with specializations in Second Language Acquisition and Urban and Multicultural Education.

Getting my Ph.D. was a really good experience. I learned a lot from it. And when I started here in my Educational Adviser role, I wanted to keep learning: specifically, about advising. So I did a graduate certificate program through Kansas State University in Academic Advising, then a graduate certificate program through George Washington University in Counseling. I did this program because I had been thinking about getting a graduate degree in counseling and I wanted to get a sense of whether I wanted to pursue it fully. George Washington has a certificate program in Counseling Culturally and Linguistically Diverse Persons, so I took a few classes there, got the certificate, really enjoyed it, and decided to stay and do a Master’s Degree in Clinical Mental Health Counseling.

 BROOKE: What sparked your interest in urban education?

PATRICIA: I think that it was a little bit the circumstances of where I was. I’ve always been interested in education, but while I was getting my teaching certification at Wake Forest, my teaching advisor and mentor put me in touch with some instructors and professors at Teachers College and it just so happened that one of the people that I networked with was the professor for a sort of education and cultural diversity course. Once I got to Teachers College, it became my favorite class. I really enjoyed the course topics and the types of projects we did, and I wound up TA-ing for that professor for several semesters. And in doing that, I saw that there were some interesting issues that I could explore within the combination of urban and multicultural education. I was also teaching in New York at the time. I taught in a private school and also did after school work and teaching assistant work at two public schools. The differences among the three schools was enormous. And that just kind of got my thoughts percolating.

BROOKE: How did you get from New York and those positions to where you are now?

PATRICIA: I think originally my thought was that I was enjoying teaching but I wanted to participate more in teaching teachers. So I thought that the main way to be able to do that was to get a doctorate in education. I had a couple of friends at Emory that I had worked with years before and Emory had a small doctoral program, so it seemed like it’d be a really welcoming, cozy community. I applied there and got a chance to do a lot of work with the prospective teachers that they had in their Master of Arts in Teaching program. I think that I would have continued along that path, but I got to a point that many doctoral students get to which is that your funding is over but you are not finished. So I had many ups and downs with advisors leaving, retiring, going on sabbatical, and it wound up taking me five years to finish instead of the four that I was on track for. So I needed to find work for that fifth year.

I looked around Atlanta for jobs and wasn’t really finding something that I thought would be a good fit, so I decided to look around up here in the DC area instead because I grew up here and my family is still here in Maryland and DC. I decided not to look for teaching positions right away because some of the other veteran doctoral students had said, “If you start teaching while you’re still trying to finish your dissertation—if you actually leave your program, leave your campus and start teaching somewhere else—you’re going to be too distracted. You’re gonna love the teaching and you’re not gonna want to work on your research and your writing.” So I wound up taking a look at some jobs outside of teaching.

I was just looking at the Chronicle of Higher Ed website—they have a jobs board—and I started getting interested in the idea of advising, which would still be connected to education but would be different from designing a curriculum for a whole semester and grading papers and that kind of thing. So just on an off chance, I looked in the nonprofit section of the job boards and there was this position to be an Educational Adviser for a nonprofit organization and as I was looking through it, I thought, “The characteristics that they’re looking for are things that are interesting and important to me and things that I think that I can do.” The population was one that interested me a lot because the Foundation works with students who have financial need—so are from low to moderate income backgrounds—but kids who are really, really bright. I had worked with kids in a gifted education program in New York and in gifted summer programs for several years during college and the early part of grad school so it felt like a really good fit.

BROOKE: So if you could describe your current position, what is your job title and what does your job involve?

PATRICIA: It’s a little bit of a lot of things. The position I have now is Lead Educational Adviser. I started off as a regular Educational Adviser and I had a caseload of students that I worked with. I still have a caseload now, just a smaller one, and I also supervise other Educational Advisers. But the nuts and bolts of the Adviser position are to work with these students from 8th grade through 12th grade and help them and their families navigate the educational system, and get access to rigorous, challenging, interesting educational opportunities. Things like getting into a high school that is going to offer all the advanced coursework that they would benefit from, getting connected to lessons in art and music and sometimes sports or dance, things like that.

We help challenge them to set high goals for themselves and become leaders in their schools and their communities and help them pursue experiences that will help them learn how to do that. We also get them connected to each other and we also fund them via a tailored scholarship budget for enrichment opportunities like summer programs; almost all of our advisees do a summer program each year. There may be other programs that they’re involved in during the course of the year like an internship or a conference related to some of their interests, so we kind of lead them through getting connected to all of those kinds of good opportunities and then also get them prepared for college. So talking to them about what their options are and what the landscape of college looks like, taking them on visits, helping to make sure they’re prepared for SATs and ACTs by getting them appropriate preparation if they need that, helping them through the decision making process. Just basically taking every student from where they are in 8th grade and making sure they have a really strong educational experience all the way through high school and that they get placed well for college.

BROOKE: So do you fund all of that then, through the foundation?

 PATRICIA: We fund a lot of it. Every student has a scholarship budget that kind of fits them and we try to put several priorities on there and then also try to accommodate students’ own wishlist items. So the first priority is going to be to make sure that the students are in a really strong high school or have access to some really good high school courses. Sometimes a student isn’t really in a position to go to a high school that is particularly well-suited to them, so we might have them go to the high school that is closest but also supplement courses at the local community college or through distance education or something like that.

We’ll make an effort to see that the priorities for a strong high school education are paid for. We generally negotiate. A lot of our students are going to a private high school, for example, but we’re not really a high school scholarship, so we’re not going to pay a $40,000 tuition to a boarding school; but we will help negotiate at that school, so that our students get really good financial aid. And then we fill in the things like a laptop or flights to and from home, books and uniforms, maybe the family contribution if it’s a couple of thousand dollars, fees for activities, things like that. We do pay for a summer experience each year, and then many other little things.

It’s a program that’s focused on filling in the gaps, so the our students have the things that families with greater financial means would usually be able to provide for their children. We’re trying to provide some of those things and we’re trying to provide the resources and the experiences that are going to allow the students to really live up to their potential. There are so many kids who come into the program in 8th grade and when we start talking about the scholarships and the resources that we’re going to be able to provide during the course of their time, their parents will say, “Oh yeah, we always wanted to do this summer program” or “We always wanted to have her in piano lessons, but we just couldn’t afford it. She was excited about it, really wanted to do it, and the only thing standing in the way was money.” So I think we’re trying to remove some of those little barriers.

BROOKE: You work for them for a long time, so I’m assuming you gain pretty strong relationships with them as well?

PATRICIA: Yeah, definitely. It differs from student to student, but I’ve been here now almost eight years, so I’ve had a chance to see a few of my cohorts of students all the way through from 8th grade through 12th grade and there are some really nice bonds that get formed. Some of those students I am already keeping in touch with as they go off to college and I know that we will stay connected for the long term. With others, maybe we don’t see or talk to each other that much once they finish high school, but there are events within the foundation that they sometimes come back for. We sponsor a few summer events and we just started an alumni event that’s held in the spring, so I think they stay connected to the community at large even if they don’t stay connected to me personally for a long time. Which is fine, I like that they know they have a nice network of peers.

BROOKE: I am assuming your job sort of changes on a day-to-day basis, but if you could describe your typical day, what would that look like?

PATRICIA: It does change a lot. My attention goes in a lot of different directions in this job. But on a given day, I’ll probably spend a portion of my time talking to students. I check in with the kids in my caseload about once every two weeks, so I will probably have a couple of half-hour phone calls scheduled in the afternoon. I might also be calling a vendor to see if I can set up lessons for a student. Today, for example, I have to follow up on someone who is going to give one of my students clarinet lessons and I need to call a stable for a student who wants to take riding lessons. So I’ll do a little bit of self-education around that.

I will be reviewing and revising goals today. The students are getting ready for—well, we’re getting reading for—planning for next year, and all of them will have individualized learning plans that include their goals, as well as the resources and programming we’re going to provide for them, their scholarships and budget. Lots of students have been completing their goals for next year and I’ll be reading a lot of those.

I’ll be checking-in with the advisors that I supervise. We also do that about once every two weeks formally, but pretty much every day somebody’s stopping by with a question about a students or a budget, or some sort of programming that we’re doing within our department. So I’ll do some chatting around that and do some documentation—we always have to take good notes about things, so I’ll be checking up on my notes. I’ll probably also correspond with a couple of parents. We talk primarily with the Scholar, as that’s where we’re trying to build our strongest rapport and because it’s the student’s education that we are trying to nurture, but the parents are the ones who are there 365 days a year and they know a lot of things about their children that we wouldn’t be able to be aware of. Most of our students are pretty far away from our office here. We have a couple of local students, but most of them are scattered far and wide across the country. Parents are a really helpful resource with checking in with them; it gives us a lot of good information, and they have questions too, and things that they’re wondering about. So we will chat with them maybe about the college process, or some questions about the interests that the student has, or there might be a financial change in the family that we need to follow up on, things like that. So I’ll probably have a couple of interactions with parents as well today.

BROOKE: What do you think is the most rewarding part of your job?

PATRICIA: I think there are a couple of things. Seeing students get a chance to do things that they’re really capable of but might not have had a chance to do otherwise is fantastic. So seeing them stretch and travel to places during the summer that would’ve been hard for them to imagine going to, seeing them become really good leaders, seeing them get access to a strong education—that’s really wonderful. And forming bonds like we were just talking about—that is very, very rewarding. I have a handful of students right now who I’ve worked with previously and they’re off at college; maintaining connections with them really makes me feel good. I feel like we’ve grown together and have all developed in really positive ways because of that connection.

I also think that having really kind, interesting, and talented colleagues is pretty amazing. Our Young Scholars program has a fairly big staff—at least, for a small organization. About 55 people work at the foundation, and the Young Scholars team has 18 people. So we are pretty big, but we are a really nice team and I think we complement each other well and we learn a lot from each other and depend on each other. So it feels really good to have the support of all of these other people and to be able to give that support back.

Those are probably the main things: the connections, personal connections. I’ve said several times that I put my counseling degree to use a lot within this job, even though it’s not a counseling position, per se. But just the interpersonal part of counseling, helping people figure things out, figure out difficult situations, or set goals for themselves, or work through something difficult. All of those things come up on a daily basis here and I think being able to apply lessons and concepts and practices from the different parts of my education to this job—that is really rewarding too.

BROOKE: So going off of that, what is the most challenging part of your job?

PATRICIA: Well, as I mentioned earlier, my energy has to go in a lot of directions, and that takes a lot of organization and the ability to multitask at a really high level and at sometimes a frenetic pace. That’s hard for me. I am a pretty calm person, so looking at my desk at the end of the day and seeing 8 or 10 different things that need to be followed up on is challenging.

I think, too, that even though we’re able to do a lot with the Scholars and their families, we still can’t do everything that we would like to. Our scope is primarily educational; that’s pretty much going to be the priority. That is fantastic and I think that does a lot for the students, but then there will always be other situations going on in their lives that we can’t fix. I’ve had students who have had incarcerated parents, or parents who have some sort of significant physical or mental illness, students who have other kinds of family difficulties or have had periods of homelessness, and a lot of times, that is something that their families have to figure out on their own, or with other resources in their communities. It can be hard to get on the phone and say, “Okay, let’s talk about the classes that you’re gonna take next year,” when you know that there is some other really difficult situation that’s going on in the background. So that’s hard. In the last couple of years, I’ve had a few students too who’ve had their own emotional and mental health difficulties, and I’m attached to them, and I care about them, and it’s difficult to see them go through that and know that they have to carry some of the burden on their own. I can’t fix it all.

BROOKE: You have students all over the United States, then?

PATRICIA: Yep, we all do. I think we have Scholars in 46 or 48 states, something like that.

BROOKE: If you could leave the reader with one final comment about your job or your passion for education, or really anything, what would you want it to be?

PATRICIA: I would recommend to other people to become really good listeners—really dedicating yourself to the art and practice of listening is important. I say that because I think there are points in life where you have to listen to yourself and to where you’re being called to do your work and live out your life, and you need to be thoughtful about that and responsive. Sometimes people ask me, sort of like you were just doing in the interview, “How did you get from this place to that place to the other place? How did you decide to do this educational program or that one?” It was just sort of a continuous process of discernment, listening to myself and thinking about what I needed to do to get to this next step in life, or recognizing when something really felt appealing to me. I had thought about doing counseling a long time ago, and that little voice in my head that said “you should try this out” never really disappeared and finally I got to a point where I listened to it and actually tried it out and I felt very grateful afterwards. So there’s a listening to yourself and the voices that guide you.

But also listening to other people. I think that is probably the most important thing that I can do and have done in any of my jobs or any of the roles within a particular job: just sit there and listen very actively and as compassionately as I can. It’s amazing how much better people feel, even if there’s nothing else that I’m able to do. If the person I am sitting with feels heard and feels cared about, then they may feel a little bit better. I think for me, working at that, working at being a good listener has been extraordinarily helpful and I think that is something that all of us could try to do a little bit more of, especially in those situations where your desire to help can only take you so far. As you know, when you go into education, it’s complex. There are going to be a lot of issues that you’ll come up against, and some of them you’ll be able to address and some of them you won’t. But if you’re able to help other people feel heard and empowered—or at least feel at ease—I think that will be a positive step and something that will be appreciated.

 

© 2024 Postscript


Academic Technology services: GIS | Media Center | Language Exchange

Theme by Anders NorenUp ↑