As I applied to different schools it was apparent that being on campus was important to many of the programs. As I was not moving, commuting distance entered into my decision. I am at my desk on average three times a week and expect that I will continue to be there at least twice a week as I write my dissertation. I think there is value in being around my colleagues and it will lead to collaborative work and a great forum for testing ideas. I also think it is good to interact with my supervisor and a number of other faculty members. AND its fun to go for beers to argue about just about anything with Indian in the Crosshairs and Sir T.
Its not always easy to get to school. Many of us commute. I have a family and am involved in a community away from school. I can also use the 2.25 hours of commuting time more productively than sitting in a car.
I think that compulsory attendance is not necessary. I do believe there are students who are not productive enough and need to be kept on a shorter leash. A professor who I once worked for as a research associate once told me that "I measure output, not input," when I asked if it was okay that I took a long lunch to play hockey. Universities are supposed to be progressive in terms of management (its not about attendance its about output - we are tight on space and are requiring people to be here) and other issues. Telecommuting is now considered a way to reduce the GHG emissions but academia is missing that opportunity. Perhaps we should consider what we're trying to accomplish rather than making blanket one size fits all requirements.
A note on telecommuting.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20070428.RCAREERCOACH28/TPStory/Environment
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment