I had to retire early from academe and was very disappointed by the lack of closure. I had health issues and thought the chair might call or email but staff were charged with all communications. I once read an article by someone whose research was actually the process of retirement. He remarked he was surprised, upon his own retirement, at the importance of the whole gold watch thing. I left academe physically but it took many more years to let go of it psychologically.
We love institutions, they don't love us back. Most important words for us all. Some of the people there can love us back, but that's up to them. We're both gone from WashU, and there are plenty of people there who DID love both of us back. But the institution is just real estate and a bank account (in WashU's case, a very large one). But as someone there who did love you - you did a great job for WashU, Liz!!!!
"I really can not understand this. To my mind, it’s a sign of a healthy department or institution when people grow into new positions and new roles. There are only so many endowed chairs or leadership positions available at a single institution, so sometimes opportunities can only be found elsewhere. And, of course, there are plenty of reasons outside career advancement to move institutions, like local politics and aging parents."
- Yes Liz exactly! I see moving onto to other institutions celebrated if you are moving from being a professor to being a chair at the new institution, but not if you are leaving for industry. It's wild that exit interviews are so lacking, especially if faculty are leaving for industry. You would think for selfish reasons the university would want to maintain contact with the leaving faculty member who could give graduate students a leg up, if the professor transitions to industry?
What really surprises me about when PIs/professors leave an institution (for whatever reason) there aren't exit interviews. Places I have been would have exit interviews with trainees but never with (those traitor) professors (how dare they left?!). The institution does not appear to have any desire to learn from these brilliant minds leaving. Maybe the answer isn't as scary in every case as the institution would think. But I think there is SO MUCH opportunity to learn and improve.
Several of my friends observed my departure in informal and ceremonial ways. But the most revealing thing was that the president, with whom I'd worked closely in shared governance and on summer task forces, said nothing at all. Bizarrely, I heard through colleagues that he referenced my newsletter (in a good way) during remarks at the fall faculty workshop. By contrast, one of the college trustees who had never worked closely with me and just shared a few of my interests, went out of his way to schedule a coffee chat. "I'm big on rituals," he said. "I just wanted to say goodbye." He's a somewhat famous person in national media, and I can't tell you how much that meant to me.
We are so hung up on professionalization these days that we minimize the importance of quirky human charm, which is often the thing that we remember best about people. It is what makes us good teachers (I believe) -- not disciplined adherence to evidence-based methods. It's why I remember the prior president fondly, despite some of his management missteps, because he took it upon himself to visit every faculty and staff member in their office on their birthday. What better way to make someone feel seen? 10 minutes of "I see you" goes a long way.
Solidarity, my friend, as you continue on your journey.
I had to retire early from academe and was very disappointed by the lack of closure. I had health issues and thought the chair might call or email but staff were charged with all communications. I once read an article by someone whose research was actually the process of retirement. He remarked he was surprised, upon his own retirement, at the importance of the whole gold watch thing. I left academe physically but it took many more years to let go of it psychologically.
Interesting to even know that there is someone studying retirement as a psychological process! I'm sorry this was your experience, and I can relate!
We love institutions, they don't love us back. Most important words for us all. Some of the people there can love us back, but that's up to them. We're both gone from WashU, and there are plenty of people there who DID love both of us back. But the institution is just real estate and a bank account (in WashU's case, a very large one). But as someone there who did love you - you did a great job for WashU, Liz!!!!
Four exclamation points!!!! Right back at you.
"I really can not understand this. To my mind, it’s a sign of a healthy department or institution when people grow into new positions and new roles. There are only so many endowed chairs or leadership positions available at a single institution, so sometimes opportunities can only be found elsewhere. And, of course, there are plenty of reasons outside career advancement to move institutions, like local politics and aging parents."
- Yes Liz exactly! I see moving onto to other institutions celebrated if you are moving from being a professor to being a chair at the new institution, but not if you are leaving for industry. It's wild that exit interviews are so lacking, especially if faculty are leaving for industry. You would think for selfish reasons the university would want to maintain contact with the leaving faculty member who could give graduate students a leg up, if the professor transitions to industry?
You would think!
What really surprises me about when PIs/professors leave an institution (for whatever reason) there aren't exit interviews. Places I have been would have exit interviews with trainees but never with (those traitor) professors (how dare they left?!). The institution does not appear to have any desire to learn from these brilliant minds leaving. Maybe the answer isn't as scary in every case as the institution would think. But I think there is SO MUCH opportunity to learn and improve.
This is so true! For all the corporatization of universities, there are some processes they could stand to adopt!
Several of my friends observed my departure in informal and ceremonial ways. But the most revealing thing was that the president, with whom I'd worked closely in shared governance and on summer task forces, said nothing at all. Bizarrely, I heard through colleagues that he referenced my newsletter (in a good way) during remarks at the fall faculty workshop. By contrast, one of the college trustees who had never worked closely with me and just shared a few of my interests, went out of his way to schedule a coffee chat. "I'm big on rituals," he said. "I just wanted to say goodbye." He's a somewhat famous person in national media, and I can't tell you how much that meant to me.
We are so hung up on professionalization these days that we minimize the importance of quirky human charm, which is often the thing that we remember best about people. It is what makes us good teachers (I believe) -- not disciplined adherence to evidence-based methods. It's why I remember the prior president fondly, despite some of his management missteps, because he took it upon himself to visit every faculty and staff member in their office on their birthday. What better way to make someone feel seen? 10 minutes of "I see you" goes a long way.
Solidarity, my friend, as you continue on your journey.
Lovely memories, Josh. And thank you.