04.18.05
Posted in life, grad school at 9:08 pm by
Well, friends, my semester is on the downswing. Finally. And, frankly, I’m exhausted. I don’t think I’ve ever worked so hard at anything as I have at school in the past 3 or 4 weeks. Thus, I’m the satisfied version of exhausted. The kind of exhausted you feel after you rake some older person’s lawn for free.
I was supposed to write about the festival of faith and music, and Christian higher education. I’m sure that those posts will come out someday, but honestly, before I can think about those things I need to recoup some of my stamina. Don’t get me wrong, I’ve got some posts in mind, but I just need to breathe a bit before I endeavor to head off into such heady topics.
What I’d like to write about today is about the blogosphere. I went to a colloquium this weekend by a fellow by the name of Joe Walther. Joe is a pioneer–though if you could see through his beard when you called him that, you’d probably find him blushing. Of particular import is Joe’s work in Computer Mediated Communication. Joe has studied the phenomena of hyperpersonal interaction.
Hyperpersonal interaction, simply explained, is basically the premise that individuals engage in an extrordinary level of attachement when given enough time in a virtual environment. I think the blogosphere, for me at least, provides a community to which I (and research shows that I am not alone here) become quickly and amazingly attached.
However, when individuals meet their computer mediated pals in a face to face setting, there is almost always some level of disappointment. Reality cannot live up to the fabricated reality we’ve created in our minds. This all just makes me ponder about this medium of which I am so fond. Is it true?
I don’t really have any answers–although, I’ve been speaking with Joe, and he and I have some interesting speculations as to what may be happening to facilitate such effects. Regardless, our speculations don’t really deal with what is true.
Nonetheless, this is a curious phenomena, no?
Permalink
04.14.05
Posted in grad school at 10:47 am by
This was posted outside the door of a faculty member in the department I’m doing graduate work at.
LUCRATIVE MONEYMAKING OPPORTUNITY
Lest any of you students think that there are no money making opportunities outside of academia, I would encourage you to consider writing a chapter for someone else’s book.
Just so you can see for yourselves just how lucrative this opportunity is, I’ve included an actual royalty cheque I’ve received from a chapter I wrote for a book called HUMAN COMMUNICATION.
And, there it was:
A cheque for a whole sixteen cents.
Permalink
03.30.05
Posted in grad school at 12:20 am by
You know that feeling you get when you’ve just mentally exerted yourself past all safe standards for thinking? I’ve got that feeling. I’m not sure how you all should feel that what I do when I just need to turn my brain off is blog. Let’s just hope this is isn’t what happens unconciously most of the time (me blogging without thinking.)
So, anyhow, I’m spent. Unfortunately, I’ve got about another 25 or so pages of manuscript to crank out by next Thursday. Needless to say, I’ll be busy for the next week / weekend. I’m not sure I’ll be good for much during that time (though if anybody is looking for a treatise on the Heuristic-Systematic Model of Social Information Processing…I could probably help you out.)
I think that I’m in what I’ll likely look back at as one of the defining moments of graduate school. One of those moments I’ll think of (maybe even fondly) and remember, “Wow, I really kicked ass and took names on those projects.” Of course, any time you have the propensity to ‘kick ass and take names’ you also have the propensity to fall flat on your ass while your classmates call you names (oh, the horrible childhood memories of my junior high classmates calling me ‘Bran-dumb’…those fuckers…I never really got over that.)
Anyway, this is probably one of those defining moments for me. And, like I was saying, in any defining moment there is a do or die mentality. I’ve found that I go into survival mode. It’s kind of like academic hibernation. Most of my body functions shut down (I haven’t had a good BM in days), I sleep less, I eat less, and (this is the kicker) I actually use my time efficiently. I am in gear.
Unfortunately, this being ‘in gear’ has some negative ramifications. I’m not very nice right now, for one. It probably sucks to be my wife during this time–I’m working on making it suck less to be my wife, but it probably isn’t really pleasant right now. I guess, the downside is really that I get pretty anti-social. I think I get more sensitive too, any little thing can send me into spirals of self doubt.
Shit. Wasn’t that last paragraph cheery? Yeah, I thought so.
I guess there’s no real moral to this blog entry. It doesn’t really fit with the theme of this blog–though, I guess I did swear; there must be some redeeming value, then.
I don’t know. It’s just one of those days, I guess. Hopefully, I get some manuscript nailed down tomorrow and I emerge a happier bad Christian on the other side of the sunrise.
Permalink
03.29.05
Posted in life, grad school at 5:59 pm by
For the next few days, I’m going to be a bit spotty with posting. School is eating me alive right now…stay tuned though…I’ll be back.
Permalink
03.08.05
Posted in grad school at 9:39 am by
I was at the hairstylist this morning. Jen and I use the same stylist. This is a good idea because it avoids the awkwardness of those ‘hairstylist conversations’ that I know we all hate. You know the ones I mean. You’ll be sitting in the chair and talk for 45 minutes straight about the weather, how much you hate the town you live in, and how much you’d love to live someplace warmer.
When you share a hairstylist with your wife you’ve got an instant topic of conversation. You can talk with that stylist about her. I like that. Anyway, our hairstylist bucks the system. She actually knows and remembers us. She asked me this morning about grad school and how it was going. I think I came up with something profound.
Hairstylist: So, if it’s spring break, why do you have to go to school today?
Me: Good question. I have a meeting with my thesis advisor. We’re going to talk about my thesis.
Hairstylist: What do you talk about?
Me: Good question. Basically, my thesis advisor reads the parts of my thesis that I have so far, and she tells me how dumb I am.
Hairstylist: That doesn’t sound fun.
Me: No, it’s not. But that’s what grad school is all about. Basically, you show up, think, and write. Your professors point out how dumb you are, time after time. Eventually, the hope is that you either drop out, or get less dumb. Either way, they turn out quality graduates. It’s really about perserverance and sticking with the process more than being smart. It’s not about being smart at all, it’s about realizing how dumb you really are.
Okay. I’ll admit that’s pretty cynical. But, I think that realizing how dumb you really are is one of the most important lessons one can learn in academia. After all, thinking you know how something works is NOT the way to get a publication. Knowing things we already know is basically recitation, regurgitation. It’s NOT knowing that really drives you toward success, toward uniqueness and, yes, genius. What an enigma.
Kinda makes you think twice about that ‘the more you know’ campaign that they used to show during the Saturday morning cartoon commercial breaks.
Permalink
03.01.05
Posted in grad school at 12:46 pm by
As I mentioned a post about boobies ago, I am a graduate student studying communication. Basically, in order to be a COM scholar (and that’s what we call ourselves) you just need to study the communication of x. (Where x is just about any other human function you can dream up.) For me x = leadership. That’s what my thesis is about.
In the first draft of my thesis proposal I did a pretty good literature review but my biggest downfall was that I didn’t define my constructs to the satisfaction of my advisor. Frankly, she was right, I didn’t define them well enough. So…before Friday I need to define leadership. Not talk about who some leaders are or what leaders do–at least not exactly–I need to define leadership, in the abstract.
At first glance, this seems like a task akin to defining the color black. How can we do it? It’s a color. It’s not white, blue, red, green, or purple. It’s the absence of light. What it really is, is hard to describe or define. The same is true with leadership. I thought long and hard about what the first step in my journey along defining leadership should be, and I thought of all of you.
Basically, you’re my semi-captive audience. (Semi-captive because you could leave if you wanted to, but in spite of all of the crap that I’ve written so far you’ve stuck around…thus, you must be captive in some sense.) So, I decided I’d try my definition out on you. Bear with me here, I’m just going off the top of my head.
Here goes:
Groups are one of the most prevalent social structures that society employs to accomplish tasks. Firefighters, accountants, executives, sports players, and educators work in teams, committees, and groups. Finding a truly leaderless where no individual has stepped into or been appointed into the role of leader is nearly impossible. Thus, the prevalence of leadership is as prevalent as the social structure of the group in modern society.
Despite the prevalence of leadership, researchers have not arrived at any one definition as to what, exactly, leadership is (Stogdill, 1974).1 Some researchers have held that a leader is the embodiment of the central will of the group (Bass, 1990)2, while others contrast trait definitions of leadership with process definitions of leadership. One point of common ground in the leadership literature, however, is that leadership exists in a group setting.
Some concepts such as power, status, or influence are closely related to leadership. However, delineating these concepts from leadership is important. While many leaders are able to exert power, for example, it is not always the case that powerful individuals will be perceived as the leader of a group. Individuals who use power in a group setting may be leaders; however, their use of power may or may not steer the group toward a group objective.
Likewise, a group members’ status may be attained through experience, age, height, or any number of other characteristics. Status, however, must also be viewed as a related but separate construct from leadership. It is true that many high status members gain a leadership title, as well. However, in and of itself status simply is a measure of the hierarchy present within a group.
Influence, as well, is a related but not sufficient condition of leadership. Influence describes the ability of group members to persuade or coerce other members of their group. Certainly, being able to get all group members to follow (by persuasion) is a quality of leadership; however, if the sucess of the group is not the motivation of the influencer, this persuasion or coersion cannot be considered as part and parcel of leadership.
One common theme found in the process of deciphering these related but different constructs is the understanding of leadership as a goal directed role. An individual must have sufficient power, status, and influence within a group. However, without that power, status, and influence being used to direct a group toward a desired outcome of the group as a whole, leadership is not present.
Proponents of the process view of leadership hold that leaders are individuals who fit the needs of a particular situation. Because task situations vary widely as to the type of leadership that must be exerted, the type of individuals who will successfully serve as leaders in these situations varies widely, as well. On the contrary, the trait view of leadership states that individuals who have a certain constellation of in-born traits will be the most likely individuals to emerge as leaders.
Thus, for the purposes of this research leadership will be defined as the quality that individuals in group settings have that allows them, through the use of power, status, and influence, to lead a group toward a goal desired by the group as a whole.
____________
1 Stogdill, R.M. (1974). Handbook of leadership: A survey of theory and research. New York: Free Press.
2 Bass, B.M. (1990). Bass and Stogdill’s handbook of leadership: A survey of theory and research. New York: Free Press.
So, did I lose you yet?
Permalink
02.28.05
Posted in grad school at 11:43 am by
Being a graduate student isn’t good for your self-esteem. Really, if you aren’t interested in getting your ass reamed time and time again, academics is probably not the right field for you.
I had a meeting last Friday with my advisor to talk over the first draft of my thesis. I’m pretty sure she thought it sucked. She’s a big believer in the process of writing one’s thesis. I think she holds that everyone NEEDS to be taken down a few notches every once and a while. She did that to me on Friday.
Now, I’m actually glad that she’s running me through the ringer on this thesis project. I really want to learn, really I do! I just had no idea how cruel the process of being an academic is. It’s really no wonder that so many academics end up sad, deflated, cynical, and lonely.
One thing’s for sure though, I have a new-found respect for people with their Ph.D.’s. At least those who hold a doctorate in the social sciences. It’s a harsh life out there.
Never fear though, I’m not about to give up, or stop being a student. I’m not even going to stop writing my blog. This is really just a very good reminder that I’m human–not some cyborg that can rattle off social science theoretical perspectives like it’s going out of style.
It turns out that I’m human, very human, and like it does for everybody else, being human sucks every now and again. So, here’s my question. Are there any current professors, or doctoral students out there who’ve seen their way through a viscious thesis project that can offer any light at the end of the tunnel? It’d be nice to know that at least one of you made it.
Permalink
· Next entries »
