CARRIE LOFFREE
In the description of the Graduating Professionals Panel published in the programme of 1997's ACTR conference, Jen Harvie described what seems to me to be the most important challenge facing universities today: "maintaining intellectual stimulation in a market-minded climate" (12).
Indeed, when questioning the efficacy of graduate school programmes, one risks falling into the trap of evaluating the "marketability" of graduates. "Marketability" is not an inherently positive characteristic. The most important books are not necessarily best-sellers, the most praiseworthy people do not usually have fan clubs, etc. Although the current climate seems to favour "marketability" over other criteria, when it comes to making decisions about funding research and art, I don't think I'm alone in believing that this characteristic is an inappropriate criterion for the evaluation of either graduate school programmes or grant proposals.
Do people go to graduate school to become "marketable"? Should they? Should universities respond to this perceived need? While some people go to graduate school with monetary and employment goals in mind, I don't think that programmes should be primarily oriented towards the achievement of these aims.
Graduate school allows candidates to do in-depth research in an intellectually and often financially supportive climate. It seems to me that this should be the primary aim of graduate school programmes, and that this goal should not be compromised by excessive emphasis on market-related criteria. However, the knowledge, skills, and experience attained in graduate school are valuable, and as such they are useful and applicable in the "real world" of the job market. So, while "marketability" should not be the aim of graduate school, it is one of its natural by-products.
Given this (underappreciated) fact, why shouldn't graduate schools take advantage of the current obsession with "marketability," rather than letting the market dictate the functioning of their programmes? One excellent way of ensuring intellectual stimulation for students working within a market-oriented climate is to facilitate, encourage, and even require them to obtain different types of experience beyond their thesis-related activities. Some stimulating types of experience are: active membership in research teams, translation and research contracts, teaching and TAships, participation in scholarly committees, publication and editorial activities, conference participation and organization, and work in the cultural milieu. Speaking as a doctoral candidate who has been fortunate enough to get involved in all these types of activity, I think that MA and MFA candidates should be required to gain three types of experience in order to graduate, and PhD candidates, five types. Why? Not because experience makes graduates "marketable" (although it does), but because it enriches their research, keeps them grounded in the "real world," allows them to gain practical "smarts" to complement their "book knowledge," breaks the isolation of thesis preparation, and allows them to make stimulating contacts and to develop and experiment with different applications of the knowledge and skills obtained at graduate school. I, for one, have found that my "extra-curricular" experience has nourished my critical reflection far more than my course work.
Remarkably, Canadian graduate school programmes in drama and theatre place very little emphasis on students obtaining experience during their schooling. I did a survey of these programmes, and here is what I discovered by reading the detailed programme descriptions presented in university calendars and pamphlets. Thirteen programmes (40%) require that applicants have some sort of experience, and only four (12%) include experience amongst their graduation requirements. While ten programmes (31%) offer candidates experience within the department, only one (3%) encourages students to get involved in job placements. I firmly believe that more programmes should require that students obtain experience both prior to and during graduate school, and that more should offer experience within the department as well as formally recognizing the value of work within the milieu.
In order to help graduate students attain and take full advantage of these types of experience, drama and theatre programmes should contemplate offering a certain number of services, such as workshops (on such subjects as teaching, preparing an effective curriculum vitae and cover letter, publishing, assembling a teaching portfolio, job hunting, and preparing scholarship and grant proposals), work placements within the cultural or pedagogical milieu, and a resource centre (with information on such topics as pedagogy, publishing, cultural organizations, theatre programmes, non-academic careers, grants, scholarships, and awards).
The current ideological and socio-economic climate is hard on graduates. There are few job openings for intellectuals, and many young graduates are obliged to take on several part-time positions, affiliate themselves with a number of institutions and organizations, and assume many different roles in order to make ends meet and ensure that they are exposed to sufficient intellectual stimulation. It is also a difficult time to be a programme director, what with budget cutbacks, increasing responsibilities and work hours, and the immense pressure associated with the conflict between "marketability" and intellectual excellence. However, neither students nor programme chairs stand to gain from neglecting to maintain intellectual stimulation in this market-minded climate. While the market's demands are limitless, the same is not true of our capacity for high-quality intellectual work. If market criteria are allowed to dominate, graduate schools will lose their ability to support the pursuit of intellectual excellence and thus lose their very raison d'être.
On a positive note, people who take on multiple roles and do different types of work (by choice or obligation) are invariably exposed to some interesting and stimulating experiences. The trick is to stop stimulation before burn-out kicks in!
WORKS CITED
Harvie, Jennifer. "Graduating Professionals." ACTR Newsletter/ARTC Bulletin de liason 21.1 (Spring 1997): 12.