Saturday, April 30, 2016

Interview with Dr. Daliang Wang

 By Fiona Rawsontile, April 2016

 I got to know Dr. Wang when he first announced his candidacy for a department chair position. Since it’s uncommon for Chinese scholars to assume administrative roles in academia, I became interested in knowing more about him. So while traveling back and forth between his current and future institutes, wrapping up old business and setting up new, Dr. Wang had to put up with the interruptions and spare time satisfying my curiosity. But I justify myself by imagining that others may also benefit from his experience and wisdom.

Fiona: At the time you applied for the Chair position, had you been shopping around for administrative openings?

Dr. Wang: I had never considered leaving my current university or seeking an administrative position until about a year ago. I was frustrated at the time when I bumped into this opening. I said to myself, “That seems like a position for me.” So I applied.

Fiona: I’m glad you did it. During the job interview, while facing your future colleagues, some of whom were probably more established than you are, have you ever doubted that you would be the right person for the business? How did you know you were ready?

Dr. Wang: I guess it’s like many other journeys in my life: I was not fully ready but had to embark on anyway. I have been working on developing programs and initiatives that fostered leadership since I started as an assistant professor. In a way, I had been preparing myself when the opportunity presented luckily. I still can’t say I am ready now, but I know I can do it in the days to come. I also believe that leadership requires a different set of skills that are not necessarily associated with academic achievements or seniority.

Fiona: I agree; it has more to do with the person’s willingness to serve a group or make a difference. What was the most difficult part during the interview? Ever wished you had known more about the individuals in the department?

Dr. Wang: You are right that the most difficult part of my interview was the lack of knowledge on the exact issues/problems faced by the department in advance. I gave an oral presentation largely based on my speculations, experience, and limited information about the faculty. During my second campus interview, I spoke to everyone in the department and discussed about their specific concerns. But still, I gained their votes without being able to please everyone.  

Fiona: You specialize in teaching non-native speakers second languages. Have you observed differences in the way native English speakers learn Chinese, as opposed to how Chinese people learn English? Do you have any advice for us ESL learners?

Dr. Wang: I believe in terms of complexity, every language is about the same, while the challenge in learning each of them is unique. For Chinese, it is the characters and tones that frustrate non-native learners. The ways of approaching a language, English or Chinese, depend on the educational practices the learners are comfortable with. So it’s hard to characterize how Americans differ from Chinese in learning a foreign language.

As for advice on learning English, I think anyone who is reading this article must have had some good ideas already. For me, I enjoyed learning English and using it in life, such as watching TV shows, movies, and reading.

Fiona: Maybe that enjoyment is the key. Do you think your linguistic expertise has advanced your career by equipping you with exceptional skills to sway your audience?

Dr. Wang: Yes and no. As Confucius said, “The superior man is modest in his speech, but exceeds in his action”. I cannot downplay the importance of words, but for this position, language was actually not in my favor as other competitors were all native-born Americans. I guess I convinced my future employer by fully presenting myself, including my education, experience, vision, and even my disposition.

Fiona: Would you like to share with us some administrative experience in the past? What kind of leadership style do you have?

Dr. Wang: I have been assuming quite a few leadership roles in and out of my institute since I started career. My most significant administrative experience came from the Intensive English Program that I established with my colleagues. As a language teacher, I had always wanted to create a program to help international students succeed in American universities. We built everything from scratch. As the founding director, I was involved in every aspect of the program establishment, including budgeting, teacher hiring and evaluation, and student recruiting and advising. That experience provided me with valuable firsthand knowledge as an administrator. As a result, we had quite a success for the first year and the program kept growing thereafter.

As for my leadership style, my goal is to assemble a well-balanced combination of leadership skills.  I would tailor my management strategies according to the situation and the individuals involved. I believe in democracy and open-communication, but when necessary, I can be decisive and tough. 

Fiona: Speaking of tough situations, what would you do if a senior faculty doesn’t listen to you or acknowledge the goals you’ve set for the team?

Dr. Wang: This is a fairly common question with no fixed answer, given that every circumstance is unique. Changes can bring problems and conflicts to certain people. If a senior faculty disagrees with me, first I would try to understand his/her perspective by listening, to see if there is a common ground. I would also seek alliance and support from others, or tackle the issue from a different angle. In the worst case when nothing works, you will have to deal with it straightforwardly. i.e., firing that person (if I can!) or just leaving him alone. Either way, I will make sure I document every step.

Fiona: Yes, keep the documentation. What do you think is the most important element for a group of people, who are largely autonomous with respect to their financial and professional status, to function as a team?

Dr. Wang: It’s apparently challenging to lead a group of professors, especially when they are literally from all over the world. Collegiality is the element that I will strive to cultivate and maintain for the department.  I will set up commonly-shared goals, transparent decision-making process, and sound mentorship, to name a few. I imagine the whole department as a ship where everyone is in the right position. They don’t have to work with each other daily, but as long as everyone is doing his/her job, the ship will be moving forward.

Fiona: On staff recruitment and tenure promotion, will you hire additional faculty in the next five years to open up new areas, strength the existing, or simply replace the to-be-retired? How would you plan to help young faculty reach the tenure criteria?

Dr. Wang: I do have a few plans to expand existing programs and establish new ones. For example, I will expand the minor in Chinese Language and create a minor in Asian Studies and Japanese. I also hope to build a joint graduate program with other departments. I intend to hire more tenure-track faculty to consolidate those programs.

Yes, I have plans for assisting young faculty in their early career, both formally and informally. Mandatory activity includes periodic observations, annual evaluations, third-year reviews, etc., which will be put in handbooks. Informal ones may come from diverse sources, such as peer-mentoring, external mentoring, and university-sponsored workshops. I will form a mentoring group and a supporting “net” for every new hire and make sure no one’s left out.

Fiona: “Glass Ceiling” is a frequent complaint we hear from Chinese faculty in the western societies, especially male. What are the obstacles you’ve observed on their way of pursuing an administrative career? What kind of skills they should try to consciously acquire for this purpose?

Dr. Wang: I actually hit my “Glass Ceiling” at my previous institute and have been struggling for a while before I got the current offer. In my case, I don’t think it had anything to do with me being a Chinese male, but certain obstacles, such as gender, race, or seniority, do exist for many of us. For me, I got caught up with the administrative transition.

We may not change things that are out of our control, but we can always improve ourselves. Unlike many Chinese professors who focus on research and scholarships, I enjoy teaching and working with people. I have been purposefully polishing my skills in communication, socialization, and public speaking ever since I came here. Those efforts may not guarantee an administrative career, but they made me better at what I do. I know my limits and exactly what I wanted. I work hard along my career path, not for the glory of the destination but for the joy of the journey itself.

Fiona: Thank you very much, Dr. Wang! Please remember to come back and share with us your new experience as you climb up the hills. And enjoy the hiking, just as you said!




Friday, April 8, 2016

火坑专业的十类lab

By Fiona Rawsontile

1. 良莠不齐型。这种我见得最多,通常老板都是比较正直善良那种。由于老板多年的
努力,在领域有一定的名气,所以时不时会有一两个优秀的学生慕名而来的,而且来了
会和老板十分投缘(老板在退休时一定会格外想念和这几个学生在一起的那些日子)。
但这些老板通常是不太会拒绝人的,也基本没开过人。所以无论任何年代,lab里总有
几个混混。但大多数人,就算资质一般,感念老板善良,也会多少productive一些。肯
定有好几个最后当了发考题的,但差的那些经常会让人惊讶:这居然是他/她lab出来的?

2. 放羊型。老板放手不管的原因多种多样:可能快退休了,可能给加了太多admin职位
,家庭原因,或者本来就是没有压力的学校。当然还可能天性如此。这种lab其实对学
生发展是不怎么好的,无论是否打算留academia。大部分是整天找不到老板,也有老板
天天在,但就喜欢聊天听音乐或者东搞西搞的。当然了,如果老板肯support学生的
idea,还给写好推荐信的话,也还好吧。只有极少数自己非常push自己的学生才有出息。

3. 二当家型。老板基本上不再train学生,也不清楚实验具体进度,一切都是由二老板
代劳。由于公立私立对title有不同规定,这个二当家可能是RP/RAP,或者一直叫
scientist。有些能干的technician其实也是这种角色。大老板travel很多,对领域内
其他人的研究非常熟悉,负责把握大方向而已,有的还写proposal,有些连proposal都
是二老板写。这种lab绝对比放羊型要强很多,通常都非常productive,设备用品都管
理的很好。但也有弊端,很多学生薄厚对二老板的管理不服:我的工资又不是你发的,
老板都没意见你叽歪什么?我前途无量,你个千老/tech哪里懂得我的高明之处?

4. 小作坊型。我见过的小作坊大部分是PI风格决定的,很多都还是有一个R01的。这类
PI都不是喜欢灌水那类,比较传统,保守。对科研和学生要求一丝不苟,但不是很大胆
。虽然不排除新PI没有多少钱的,被逼搞小作坊,但我见过的上进的PI,即使没多少钱
,也会想办法搞些免费或者TA便宜本科生访问生来,所以作坊照样能搞很大。小作坊自
然不会大产量,也(因为PI保守)很少弄到高因子杂志上去。不过因为管理严格,还是
在比较不错的杂志有稳定发表。

5. 事在人为型。如上所述,新PI,学校也不太好,资源很有限。但是自己想尽办法,
还是可以东拉西凑搞很多东西出来。这种lab出来的学生肯定学会了不少动手技能,坏
处就是老板名气不够,学校也一般。这种学生在这里出来后,再去大牛lab镀金一下就
完美了。

6. 穷途末路型。有小型或中小型,但一眼看去就知道是穷途末路。通常还不是要退休
那种。功成圆满退休的,无论大小都有种喜庆平和在内。这种穷途末路型通常有两个特
色,一,funding吃紧(但不是唯一的因素,因为很多好lab也可能有困难时期),关键
是二,之前的好几年都没有像样的publication,学生出路也很不好。大部分都走的走
,散的散,留下的可能是极其老实,或者在等拿到学位,或者家庭原因的。这个说起来
,PI责任很大。虽然funding谁都不能保证,但是当钱还没用光,人还有几个的时候,
应该保证publication才行。所以通常都有PI个人疏忽因素在内。

7. 桃李天下型。PI名气必须很大,才能保证个个都是明星学生。这个PI也不像第一类
那么心软,招人的时候是比较谨慎的,有的甚至只招打算留在学术界的,所以好处是一
定会支持学生找教职。虽然肯定没有太多时间管学生,但要求还是比较高的。大家发的
都是很不错的paper。自己名气,再加上学生资质,最后真的是有很多徒子徒孙干这行
。唯一坏处就是将来子孙们,因为干的都很近,可能成为竞争者。

8. 纯粹牺牲型。PI可能名气也不小,但主要特点就是lab基本没人最后在本国(注意这
很重要;外国不算)找到教职甚至工业界工作的,而且大部分是国际学生。这类情况我
见过的有两个原因:一,方向太差,太窄,或者太冷。这么说吧,PI自己是立足了,但
学生能找的教职工作非常有限,因为需求少(比如很高级动物;很多学校没这个设施的
)。二,PI过于自私。上面几类也不乏自私的,但没到这个程度。比如卡着不给毕业不
给写推荐信的,或者和学生抢credit的,还有不允许学生自己申请grant的(怕拿到马
上走掉)。很多学生虽然回到自己国家能找到教职,但留在这里是没希望的。

9. 自主沉浮型。PI并不是放羊类的,Lab也是有些钱的,甚至有的钱不少。但是PI多少
有些管理或者性格缺陷。比如有些个人喜好太重,对待学生不是按照成绩而是偏袒部分
人。这样非常影响学生积极性,除非是意志很坚强的。还有的太moody了,忽冷忽热,
今天把你夸上天,明天又狠批一顿。还有的缺乏主张,一会儿说干这个一会儿干那个,
出了错都怪学生。这种lab出来的学生前途很难说,要靠自己,但和放羊型又不一样。
光是用功的学生未必能存活,还得精明懂事,知道如何为前途打算,会和PI搞好关系才
行。比如PI支持,拿到K99,然后找到教职就是PI同事了。不成器的还是占多数。

10. 游戏人生型。这种lab因为刚好在某时候碰到了很好的机遇,或者方向极度
clinical,不缺钱(但钱也不多)。PI本身就没多少硬功夫,但对科研还是挺有兴趣,
整天都乐乐呵呵,到处travel参加各种会议,玩,找人合作。学生来了也没几个正经干
活的,PI也不太在乎。组会开的还挺勤,但都是讲理想型.  Alright! We will soon 
start a new project! 讲了半天significance,但具体怎么干老下不来,或者订好了
老没人干。(我曾在这种lab rotation一个学期,个个都不喜欢我,因为我是唯一一个
督促大家干活的。)当然了,由于productivity太低,这种方式长久不了。