Changing research perspectives - a career trap?

 Since I finished my PhD I have not researched the same field. My dissertation was on history of migration with a clear perspective on state and municipal policy. My ongoing research projects have instead come to focus on two main fields. First and foremost, I have written on the history of sexual education in late 19th and early 20th century Sweden. Secondly I have also returned to my previous profession as an archivist and written a bit on digital appraisal policies and approaches at large archival institutions. 

When I changed my perspectives, some people told me that it was a mistake in regards to career. Perhaps they are right, and perhaps they are not right. From one perspective I still get funding for my other projects and I also learn a lot. On the other hand, I do not fully see the long term effects and I could for instance see a scenario were having a strong expertise in one field would be an advantage, none the least when applying for highly specialised positions in for instance migration studies. In the other hand, my research profile has also become significantly increased and some of the aspects in my sexuality research have a clear relevance for immigrant policy. 

Another aspect I think is important is the idea of career and how it should affect our choices. In today’s academia there exists a theoretical chance of a so called tenure track, but you are never guaranteed that. For me an academic career is instead thinking of were my skills would be put to best use, whilst I also develops as a researcher. A career should in my view not only focus on positions and salaries, all which are important aspects, but they can not be the sole permitor to think about.

My biggest problem with changing field is that it was time consuming. Only 1,5 year in I still feel that I have to learn in regards to previous research. Hence I have sort of traded off depth for width in my research profile. But in the end I am also more motivated, and the best articles are the ones that gets finished.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The use of history and why historians should mind the gap

Image
 Around two decades ago we can to some extent see how a paradigm hit Swedish history science in full force. This paradigm consisted of studies on how history was used in society and often came with a theoretical luggage from the German and English tradition. After having supervised student theseses on this area I still remain somewhat doubtful as too how students, and historians, often uses these theories. Perhaps this is also due to my PhD-thesis containing a similar approach when it comes to putting the past into neat little boxes. My criticism towards this paradigm is that it have come to be utilised as a way to only package uses of history, rather than what these packages contains. Let us for instance take the form of studying uses of history as narratives or if one so wishes, tropes. The idea here is to study how certain forms are expressed as stories of trauma, grief or “from darkness to light”. What this actually is about in the more theoretical work is to study how history ...
Read more

Contemporary Sexual Politics: Efforts to Silence Sexuality in Politics

Image
Following up on last week’s post, we can ask ourselves where questions of sexuality are being challenged in politics. From a contemporary perspective, I would argue that we are currently witnessing global attempts—particularly from conservative actors—to banish issues of sexuality from public discourse. In Foucauldian theory, we can speak of several forms of the exercise of power. Foucault uses the concept of biopower to analyze social views on sex, capitalism, and power. One of the central aspects of biopower is that it often operates through the individual, who is expected to internalize social norms rather than be externally forced to accept them. Yet, in the case of sexuality, we have over the past decades witnessed rather forceful attempts to silence it, thereby making people unaware of important aspects of their own sexuality. In such cases, the effort seems to lie in banishing "unwanted" expressions from public discourse, thereby limiting the individual’s scope for a...
Read more

Contemporary Sexual Politics: a Background

Image
This is the first part in a series of three posts in which I aim to discuss contemporary sexual politics from a more theoretical and research-based perspective than in my other posts. It forms part of a broader discussion on how sexuality can—and perhaps should—be understood as constituted by a multitude of actors. Therefore, we might not be able to speak of a single contemporary politics of sexuality, but rather of a range of political positions. During the 20th century, numerous philosophers and researchers attempted to write “the history of sexuality,” but the one who has influenced me the most is the French philosopher Michel Foucault. I have actually read all three of his original works on sexuality, but I believe the first book covers the essential foundations for discussing and understanding sexuality. Broadly, this can be said to consist of two levels of particular interest to this series of posts: a) the repressive hypothesis b) the discussion on power/knowledge and the multi...
Read more