No subject

[Gil Rappaport]

I would like to register my dismay at the particular set of desiderata
contained in the recent (and already rightly controversial) Rutgers job
announcement posted here.

Along with several others who have expressed their opinions, I recognize the
need for a native
speaker on the teaching staff. Indeed, a program without a trained,
experienced, and competent native speaker instructor for advanced language
classes
would be incomplete. That isn't the point. Nor is some form of `nativism' or
`American jobs for Americans' the point (pace Prof. Peter Houtzagers).

The point should be, I think, the conflating of several roles into one job
position: language coordinator, publishing scholar,
instructor of a beginning linguistics course, AND language instructor at
all levels  (I've deleted the original message - this is my
recollection). We all understand that times aren't good, that departments
are being asked to get by with fewer resources, and that individuals have to
play a wider range of roles, but I think that departments and their chairs
have to be
creative in resisting this pressure. In particular, requiring that it be a
native speaker of Russian who coordinates a language program, teaches
linguistics, and does scholarly research is unfairly
discriminatory against non-Russian-born academics, because that requirement
is completely irrelevant to these aspects of the job description. If the
department wants to arbitrarily restrict itself in this way and perhaps not
get the best candidate for the job, that MAY be their prerogative (it also
may NOT be, but I know nothing about the legal issues). And I will resist
the cynical temptation, rampant among graduate students, to view such job
descriptions as a sham, tailored to define the qualifications of a
pre-selected candidate. But I think the field should protest this sort of
discrimination not only because it is inherently unfair to individuals not
born in particular circumstances, but because it undermines the viability of our
graduate programs. How can we attract the best, most academically-promising
students to our program, AND (no less important) encourage them to COMPLETE
the program, if there is a sense that a good portion of the few existing
positions will not be open to them regardless of their language skills, academic
qualifications and specializations?

-Gil Rappaport
 Univ. of Texas at Austin