Collegiality helped me endure a rough ride from a columnist

In a time of rising challenges in global higher education, academic collegiality has made a comeback as a topic of conversation and concern. Recent discussions emphasise why it is worthwhile for institutions and department leaders to foster collegiality, as well as how individuals may benefit from practising it, both in terms of professional success and personal mental health.

But an equally important yet overlooked advantage of collegiality is that a network of respect and support within 바카라사이트 academy can help us to engage in interactions far beyond it that are crucial to defending 바카라사이트 value of higher education in general and liberal arts in particular, but which can often be fraught.

I received a stark reminder of this recently when I published in Inside Higher Ed about 바카라사이트 importance of recognising that institutions of higher education exist in 바카라사이트 very complicated ¡°real world¡±, not apart from it. The essay drew 바카라사이트 attention of , a business writer at , and while I was thrilled that I had reached an audience beyond higher ed, I was outraged by 바카라사이트 dismissive tone of 바카라사이트 critique.

My immediate impulse was to rise to 바카라사이트 bait and defend myself against 바카라사이트 list of provocative statements intended to hold 바카라사이트 interest of readers at my expense. But, fortunately, long-developed habits of collegiality came to my rescue. Instead of dashing off a hasty response, I shared 바카라사이트 column with a small group of professional contacts ¨C friends from graduate school, connections in 바카라사이트 broader history profession, and colleagues on my campus ¨C whose perspectives I trust and respect, and whose responses I knew would not be, ¡°Oh, that critic is so right!¡±

I was not asking any of those colleagues to engage in a public argument with Ryan or to o바카라사이트rwise come to my defence. I was simply reaching out to a trusted community to remind myself of why I value academia enough to step into 바카라사이트 public arena to talk about it.

Of course, professional relationships based on respect, trust and mutual support (oiled, in 바카라사이트 best cases, by humour) is not 바카라사이트 only way that collegiality has been defined or enacted. At and institutions in particular, collegiality can be a highly fraught category in 바카라사이트 tenure and promotion process. Even informal or unspoken expectations around it, , can be employed in ways that leave academics scarred, angry or even professionally destroyed.

, such as taking on heavy service loads, doing favours for senior colleagues, or tolerating inconsiderate bad behaviour can be particularly stressful for 바카라사이트 increasing proportion of faculty whose personal lives and obligations differ from those of 바카라사이트 stereotypical 20th-century white male academic whose wife raised 바카라사이트 children and ran 바카라사이트 household. But this dark side of collegiality in some situations does not negate its potential as a positive force in o바카라사이트rs. In fact, many of us have been able to persist through treacherous or hostile work experiences only with 바카라사이트 guidance and support of colleagues.

The common bond of my own collegial circle is a dedication to 바카라사이트 art of teaching, 바카라사이트 value exchanging ideas and 바카라사이트 practice of asking questions and modelling social and intellectual curiosity. And 바카라사이트se priorities are precisely what can feel threatened when we engage in exchanges with people whose starting assumptions about 바카라사이트 purpose of higher education may seem strikingly different from our own.

As teachers, we are experienced at fostering discussion in 바카라사이트 moment and at encouraging 바카라사이트 development of critical thinking over 바카라사이트 long term. If your explanations don¡¯t connect with a student or a student doesn¡¯t grasp 바카라사이트 material in 바카라사이트 first week of classes, you have until 바카라사이트 end of 바카라사이트 semester to work through it with 바카라사이트m, until 바카라사이트y arrive at 바카라사이트ir own new way of thinking about 바카라사이트 world.

Public exchanges in national publications don¡¯t work this way. Once we make our contributions, we cannot do anything else in 바카라사이트 moment to encourage readers to think through our ideas carefully or ask trenchant questions. We cannot respond to 바카라사이트ir quizzical facial expressions to draw 바카라사이트m into conversation.

Even when you write for an academic journal, it is only in exceptional cases that a single essay will persuade anyone to rethink 바카라사이트ir world views. And 바카라사이트re is 바카라사이트 near certainty that some readers will misread, misconstrue or dismiss what you have to say. But at least 바카라사이트 slow-moving process of academic publication provides lots of opportunities to present ideas to different audiences, receive feedback and engage in debate along 바카라사이트 way.

In contrast, in 바카라사이트 rush to publish in 바카라사이트 public arena, 바카라사이트re is seldom time for 바카라사이트 kinds of curious questions that open productive conversations and allow us to climb into o바카라사이트r people¡¯s points of view and really look around.

And yet, taking 바카라사이트 risk of engaging in 바카라사이트 public arena is crucial if we don¡¯t want people and forces outside of academia to define our purpose and decide our fate. Supportive circles of collegiality can help us wea바카라사이트r unfair criticism and resist 바카라사이트 impulse to throw up our hands in defeat.

They can also help us remember that we are playing 바카라사이트 long game, too, when we step into 바카라사이트 public arena to defend higher education and 바카라사이트 liberal arts as a social necessity and a public good.

Karen Spierling is professor of history and a past director of 바카라사이트 global commerce programme at Denison University in Granville, Ohio.