Mama PhD

I was in college when I was first exposed to Economics being applied to nontraditional topics. One of my professors at the time was researching the topic of “envy.” It was many years before the book “Freakonomics” became popular, but that small exposure helped me to look at economics in a broader way. When it came time for me to write a dissertation, I drew from the knowledge that economics can be used to explain many things besides the workings of business firms to begin my research on nonprofit organizations and on volunteer labor. I thought of that professor’s research recently when I realized that, while we do not live in the most expensive part of town, there are aspects of our neighborhood that I would not trade for anything.

I don’t do book clubs. The “why” seemed obvious to me: as a literature professor, I spend much of my...

One of my best friends in grad school was also my best colleague. When we first met early in my first year of graduate school (her second), we were in different graduate programs, both of us attending a neurobiology class and we bonded on the bus ride to the medical school class three times a week. I bombed the class - she aced it - but it was well worth my taking, since getting to know her was probably one of the single best things for my graduate career.

I've been trying, more or less successfully, to complain less, work smarter rather than harder, and take some time for myself, this semester. In other words, I've been trying to avoid becoming one of the miserable professoriate described in William Panapacker's recent piece in the Chronicle of Higher Ed. I really don't think it's my duty to be miserable--and, most of the time, I'm really not miserable. I have a great job with colleagues I like and respect, my time is usually pretty self-scheduled, and it would be worse than churlish to complain about committee work or excess grading when I am lucky enough to be employed, let alone tenured.

When the Supreme Court heard arguments in Abigail Fisher's suit against the University of Texas last week, the focus was on the right of a public university to use affirmative action to ensure a "critical mass" of diversity among students. There is another aspect of this case, though, that warrants consideration, though probably not a SCOTUS decision.

The calculus behind Economics teaches that consumers make choices so as to equalize the marginal utility per dollar spent on each of the last of different types of items purchased. Although I believe this, I was reminded recently of what I think is often an alternative decision rule I heard years ago that might better describe the way cash constrained students make decisions when seeking places for dining out.

Last weekend I was able to catch up with several Mama Phd friends who live in New York City. Many of these women are my age, but have (smartly) waited to have children until their careers/degrees/relationships are more established. Two friends have several tots under ten running around while seeking tenure, publishing books and chairing departments. I was impressed by how these friends still manage to be turned on by new ideas as much as by their partners. Indeed, many of these friends have taken motherhood out of their homes and into their research, art and service work.

Sometime in the past week I heard a line on a public radio program that has been running through my head: Women today can have it all, just not necessarily all at the same time. I wasn’t paying careful attention to the program, or time of day, so I don’t know to whom this quote should be attributed. It was only later that I remembered it and it resonated.