Jo VanEvery 0:00
Welcome to Creating A Satisfying Academic Career. I’m Jo VanEvery, and today I’m going to be talking to Lucie Matthews-Jones. Lucie, do you want to introduce yourself and say who you are and what you do, and that sort of thing?
Lucie 0:14
I’m Lucie. I’m a historian, or as I like to think of myself as a Victorian historian, because it rhymes so well. I’m based at Liverpool John Moores, where I’ve been for the last kind of 13 years, and I probably have a kind of, slightly, kind of, busy, sort of, profile in the sense that I obviously do research, which I really enjoy and I love. It focuses on what could be described as the British settlement movements, which is where sort of socially concerned modern British people went and lived in urban working class districts to kind of bring about kind of education, social, and philanthropic services. But I also am really passionate about teaching, and I’ve done some writing about teaching. And because I can’t bear the idea of not doing everything, I’ve also looked at a lot about what it means to be a disabled and neurodivergent researcher within my own institution. And I’ve done a lot of kind of service work around sort of thinking about what research culture looks like, and perhaps the barriers, but also sort of celebrating and thinking about kind of the exciting ways that disabled and neurodivergent people engage with their research process and what they do.
Jo VanEvery 1:38
Fantastic, and that’s- I mean, because you’re interested in all those things. That’s kind of why I invited you, because one of the things that I do, and I’ve been trying to do with my blog and my business for a long time, and I’m trying to do with this podcast, is to help scholars understand that there are lots of different ways to be an academic, and a lot of times, certain of those ways to be an academic seem to be, to get a lot more notice or a lot more prestige or whatever. There’s a sense that you have to do it a certain way, but people vary, right? And and some of that in ways that can be disabling in current social structures, and some of that just in normal, you know, you vary in terms of why you came into academia, what things were more important to you, all that kind of thing. So I just want to, kind of, with the podcast kind of help people understand some of that, and it seemed to me that you were doing some really interesting things around teaching and service and research that people might want to hear about.
Jo VanEvery 2:53
So, the other thing I want to say though is in the episode that came out on August 7, which is happens to be the day that we’re talking. I don’t know when we’re going to publish this, but the episode that came out on August 7 with Anna Law. One of the things she said was, you know, there there can be the career you want, but there’s only so many job opportunities, and sometimes you go in saying this is kind of what I want, and you get what you get, and then you make the best of it, and sometimes you’re actually like, “Oh, these are the kinds of things that I’d really like to have, and you do have some choices.” In a way, it doesn’t really matter if you can… You know, I sometimes say, like, I like to think of Mick Jagger and Keith Richards as prophets in a sense for saying, you know, you can’t always get what you want, but if you try, sometimes you get what you need, right? And so I think it’s okay to want what you want. Sometimes people don’t let themselves want what they want because they’re like, “Well, what if I can’t get it? And then I’m just going to be disappointed.” It’s like, but if you try going for it, sometimes really interesting and cool things happen.
Jo VanEvery 3:57
So, I don’t know exactly what you wanted when you started, or even if that matters anymore, but you ended up 13 years ago getting a job at Liverpool John Moores University, which is for those people that don’t know it, a history as being more of a teaching-focused institution. Not that people don’t do research, but there is more teaching, possibly more serving local community as part of their mission – that kind of, it’s that kind of a a place. It’s definitely not Oxford. It’s not that kind of place at all. So you got that 13 years ago, and you’ve been there, and you have been promoted, and you have all that kind of thing, and even reward – you’ve had awards internally.
Jo VanEvery 4:42
So, maybe we could start with talking about the teaching which you are really interested in. And I noticed in your bio that you won an award from the Royal Historical Society back in 2018 for your teaching. You’ve been recognised by your own institution as well. And that since then, you’ve also worked with one or more of your colleagues to create a – to host a series of workshops called “Creative History in the Classroom”. Like, those are done now, but you did that a couple of years ago. So, what was going on with Creative History in the Classroom?
Lucie 5:18
So, as a kind of, I think disabled and kind of neurodivergent academic, one of the things that I’ve always been really conscious about is the way in which the written word kind of dominates, the sort of, ways in which we communicate. And I think within the British context, there were a couple of things that were, kind of, happening. There was a lot more kind of push to try and think about public history, and how students should be sort of encouraged to think about different ways of disseminating and communicating history. And also, within my own institution, I was at that point teaching year-long modules, and we had to have three assessment points. And so I kind of, you know, was doing the essay, I was doing the source analysis, and I wanted to do something that was a bit more fun and playful. And so I kind of, really latched on to this kind of movement that was occurring, and that had been kind of started in North America around the ‘un-essay’. And so I thought: “Oh, this would be a really interesting sort of assessment point for my own students.” And since then, I’ve really kind of expanded on that idea about what creativity is in the history classroom, partly because, I think I was perhaps a little bit inclined to think that students should be creative, but the learning process that I was giving those students wasn’t necessarily innovative around creativity. Like, we were doing poster work, I was trying to bring in role play, but it wasn’t going very successfully. So then I started to actually think about this idea of actually how creativity is about making and unmaking, and that is what it means to be knowledge producers. We’re always making knowledge. We’re always un-making knowledge. We’re always building on knowledge. And so now, especially since COVID, I’ve really latched onto this idea of small creativity – the idea of bringing kind of, like, small exercises into the classroom. And I do this probably mostly in my gender history module, but also in my 19th-century urban history module, where I invite students to think about what they’ve read and then how they might think about it as a creative product. So that could be the idea of making scenes, or sewing, or maybe creating LGBT plates for for the classroom. And I think, in some ways, this kind of approach to creativity is something that’s always been a part of history. But we’re very shy [at] admitting that we’re a creative subject, because we have such a kind of narrow idea, I think, sort of, even culturally around what creativity is. We often think it is about kind of being artistic, and or having like this ta-da moment around kind of maybe writing poetry, or stories or something like that. So I’ve really been keen to think about creativity, but I’m also very conscious that not everyone has to do that –
Jo VanEvery 5:18
Yeah. Yeah. No…
Lucie 8:30
– and not everyone has to lean into that. But I’m really, I’m really passionate about it. And I, I think for me, increasingly the complexity, and sort of, like, the ways in which our students are showing up in the classroom invites us to have to think a little bit more about how do we dismantle some of the intellectualism, or the academicness of what it means to be a student now?
Jo VanEvery 8:59
So… So, I really like that link that you made between creativity as making and unmaking, and the production of knowledge, because I have – often without really thinking too hard really, about what creativity is to be fair – I have often said that, you know, use that term ‘creating knowledge’ and talked to- about, you know, academic writing as a creative process and made connections. And one of the people that works with me – she provides mostly tech support and stuff for me, and has also become a friend over many many years – is a visual artist. Like, that’s what her main job is. She does a bit of tech support and web design on the side to, you know, to be able to pay the rent when the visual art, when she was building the business. But she’s a portrait artist in in a very old tradition of art. And so, one of the things she does is, like, in her newsletter and on social media, is post things about her process. You know, of painting, like “how does that look?” Because I don’t know anything about that, right? And you know, we often think about that, and there is, like, there are so many parallels to creating other things, right? It’s just, like, she has a particular vision and a particular set of materials that she uses, but you know, the the sort of sense that there are stages where the draft you’ve just completed doesn’t look anything like the final version, right? And all of that kind of stuff. And it’s just like… But also, that sense that as you’re doing these various stages of your process, you’re learning more, and, and creating new knowledge, and learning learning new things, right? And, and introducing students to that process. Like, shifting them from the idea – I mean the, one of the dominant ideas, which has, like, kind of, popped up again because some idiot is about, talking about it, that doesn’t know anything about history is talking about it in relation to AI. But you know, the idea that ‘history is just a bunch of facts’. Right? Like, that’s just such a dominant cultural idea about what history is. So I think this idea that this is – that knowledge is this thing we create – that it isn’t just a bunch of facts that we kind of uncover, or whatever, that can speak for themselves, is is already something we’re kind of, you know, most historians are sort of aware of. So, you’re just saying: “Well, we don’t just have to use words to do this. We don’t just have to use this very limited set of forms, like the essay, and the source analysis” – or whatever, right? Which I’m assuming all the, all the historians listening know exactly what you mean by a source analysis, and the rest of us are like, “Okay, I can kind of imagine what that might be. We’ve got a similar thing in our discipline” – or whatever. So what are some of the activities? Like, I kind of, I kind of have this, like, you were talking in a recent Studio thing about taking students for, like, walks, and I know you do some of that with your own research on the settlement movement. So, like, how do you, how do you use something like walking, which most people don’t think of as creative, in both your teaching and your research?
Lucie 12:27
Yeah, so I think one of the things I’ve increasingly started to realise is a lot of my ideas around research and teaching are all about the body, the body in kind of motion, and in activity, and walking is something I really enjoy doing with my students. And that’s either through just doing a normal conventional kind of walking tour, or alternatively, like there’s one session I do with my Victorian city students, where like, luckily 10 minutes away is Faulkner Square, which is this kind of really interesting kind of early Victorian, possibly more Georgian square. It’s a bit like those classic London squares that you see, but it’s in Liverpool, and at the time it was classed as a suburb, which for us is probably really surprising because it’s like literally I don’t know 12-15 minutes walk from the city centre. But it was the edge of the city, which is what suburbs are. And so what we do is we then walk to Faulkner Square, and I sort of introduce them to the kind of formation of the streets, to the buildings, to the designs, to thinking about “Well, why does this building look like this?” and all of that. And then I get them – when we arrive in Faulkner Square – to kind of, like, think about kind of the senses, and the noise, and get them to walk around, and to think about “What do all the different buildings look like?” And I think, what that really kind of encourages is, in all of this, is… One of the problems, I think, with knowledge production is, we’re not very good at ever thinking about the production side. And it maybe… It sort of like, leans into what you’re talking about process which is, a lot of the times, I think, when you give students reading, it kind of – and history is a really bad subject for doing this is – we don’t talk about methods very well. We just produce the information, like, and we produce our analysis, and what we want to say to our students, but we don’t really give a sense of how we get to that process, how we get to the final product. And so, in getting them to walk around, what I’m really keen to get them to do is to activate their brain, and to think about kind of, like, how the reading they’re set that week is animated through the material culture, or through the layout of the place and space. And I think it just kind of really centres the idea that in some ways, the joining up of knowledge for students has to be more kind of activated and animated for them, because one of the really kind of frustrating things about history teaching is that when they come to us from doing it at GCSE or A levels, they’ve often had to rely on the idea that what they’re doing is kind of like this rote learning. They’re learning facts, but at university we want student voices, we want student agency, and we want them to be, almost like: ‘give us a surprise about something that you can see’. But that’s not how they come to us as students. And so, for me, like, creativity is just one way of actually kind of suggesting to them that when joining up the dots, you can do it through kind of messiness, and it can be playful, and it can be less kind of, like, linear, and it’s not about notes. And I also think the body as well, rather, that if you centre the body, whether or not that’s cutting up, or sort of you know colouring in, rather than writing or walking – what the body is doing is it’s thinking. And there’s not enough space, I don’t think, [given] to the idea of thinking. Partly because, for students – but this is also for academics – we’re bound up by this kind of rhythm, and this speed to always be producing, to be fast. And in some ways, when, with my creative activities, what I really like is the kind of way that they actually get to talk to each other by being slower, by offering them prompts to think about, to think about kind of the reading, but also the process that they’re sort of like going through, and they’re more confident to actually expose when they’re struggling through. Because, like, you know, sewing, for instance, they can often do cross stitch. When they, when I ask them to cross stitch their initial, they’re actually really bad at it. But they don’t mind, they don’t mind being bad at creativity because you’re allowed to be bad, not being creative. But you’re not allowed to be bad in a classroom setting, or to feel that you’re developing in a classroom setting, because we almost can lean too far into the idea that everything has to, or the student has to, be coming in how we want them to leave in the third year, for instance, is how I can, how I can sometimes feel about teaching.
Jo VanEvery 17:35
Absolutely, absolutely. That that… And especially… Yeah, yeah. I think some of the conversation about grading, which has happened, especially in the U.S. where people sometimes have a bit more flexibility about what they’re doing around assessments and grading, has really tapped into that notion of like, if everything is about the grades, then how do you, how do you focus on development? And I think one of the things… You know how sometimes you read a thing, and it sticks with you for a really long time, right? Even though you haven’t read it. And there was a thing I read when I was a graduate student in the early ’90s – and so it was published in like 1989 in the journal Gender and Society – it was based on a presidential address or in a keynote at their conference, and it was it was by Barrie Thorne, and she was talking about children in sociology. I’m a sociologist, right? And she was, and she was talking about how we understand children in sociology, and one of the things she said in that, was that, we often, that these, that she was drawing on some other scholars’ work, and I- (you know, it’s been a long time since I’ve read this, so I’m not going to have all the all the proper kind of citations at the tip of my fingers), but the the really powerful thing for me was this way that she was drawing on other scholars’ work, including a historian, possibly Tamara Hareven, about different kinds of time. And she was talking about historical time, and there were three: there was historical time, and developmental time, and something else. And one of the things she said is that, we often see children purely in developmental time, right? That we see them as always ‘becoming’, and we don’t locate them in the historical moment, right? And like, a really small example of that is when I first had my child, which again, almost 30 years ago now, I remember my mom coming to visit, and making some comment about the clothing I’d put on her, and how I was dressing her like a 20-year-old because I’d put little dungarees and a t-shirt on her as opposed to what she saw as baby clothes. And, and again, it’s this thing about, somehow… “What, somehow babies don’t exist in a particular historical moment? Like, there’s just baby clothes.” Right? And and if you’re dressing them in something that feels like contemporary to the moment in which you’re living, that you’re dressing them like an adult, like that, that was sort of how she felt. And I definitely… Having read that so many years ago, early in my, you know, I was a PhD student at the time – I think that kind of, sense of questioning, like: “How are we seeing these people in time?” Like: “Are we seeing them as kind of individuals living in this historical moment?” Blah blah blah. [Or] “Are we just seeing them as these people in a particular stage of a developmental process?” And, and I think that’s a really important distinction to make. And what you’re pointing out, is that we then created an education system that, at the one, at the- on the one hand, just sees them that way, right? “These are people becoming graduates, and we need them to show us that they can be that thing at the end, even though they’re not there yet, while also making it hard for them to actually be developing and making all the mistakes that we have to make in order to learn” – and and all of that kind of thing, right? And then I guess the other thing is, is this focus on – which, again there seems to be a rising tide of people that are like “Children need to sit still.” – I don’t know… As a Victorianist, you must find it kind of weird to have so many people being like, “Oh, what we really need is more discipline in schools, and people have to sit still, and look at the teacher, and not be staring out the window”, and all this kind of thing. And it’s just like, okay, I’m sorry, I’m not, I’m not really sure… Whereas you’re like, “No. Being in the body [is better]”, “How can I introduce, into my teaching, ways for my students to be more in the body?” That… Yeah… It just… That just seems… That’s, like, really an interesting thing. And, and [as] part of that, you’ve developed those things, like, by running these workshops. Like, how… You’re not just doing it on your own, right? And you’re not just reading books about the un-essay, or whatever, right? You’re actually talking to your own colleagues about these things and developing them collaboratively. Is that true?
Lucie 17:35
Yes. And like one of the things I really have enjoyed are the creative history workshops that I did a few years ago. And what was so exciting about that is we just had a range of international scholars, because we did them online. And we did them more as kind of like sort of focused workshops rather than a whole one day conference, or two day conference. And so we kind of had these, like, themed focuses, and we were able to get scholars from Argentina, Japan, North- all over North America…
Jo VanEvery 22:35
Wow!
Lucie 22:35
Obviously in Britain as well. And it was just really interesting to hear about how different, different disciplines are using historical sort of modes of teaching, like, to bring creativity into the classroom. And it was kind of intriguing that in some ways it wasn’t- it wasn’t really historians that were sort of leading some of this stuff. It was English scholars, it was art historians, it was people who were teaching English as a second language. And what I really, what really struck me through all of this was, sort of, like, the ways in which almost, I I think, sort of, like… One of the things you kind of said was, like, this kind of historical moment. And I think what was interesting, was actually the ways in which all of these members of staff were actually being reflective about the moment and thinking about how that could be put into their teaching.
Lucie 22:58
Because I’m very convinced that some of the ways in which history, but, a lot – history as a subject, but also universities – are kind of predicated, really, on a very traditional understanding of what university education is. I don’t know how true this is. I feel like I read this, like, probably a billion years ago. But I can, I think I can remember John Ruskin. I think he might have said that: “The reason why Oxbridge students had to write essays was because they’d go into the civil service, where they would always be writing reports.” And I just, I thought that was kind of really interesting, that even then they were latched onto the idea of, like, “Well, where are the students going to?”
Lucie 24:33
But in some ways, what recently I think everything has always been for me, is about this question about: “How do we create learning environments for everybody?” So when I first started at LJMU, I was teaching students that were home-based students. So, they largely came from Liverpool. They were from, sort of, a wider sort of social economic group. They were sort of typically white working class, and that’s, and the profile that still exists in in my university and in my programme. And we’ve also started to see kind of the recognition that actually there are more students that are disabled and neurodivergent, and that’s coming through from, coming from earlier education. But also I think COVID as well actually invited us to be more reflective about whether or not our teaching worked in certain contexts, and I I I kind of really believe that those sort of those kind of like questions that we’ve had have made me want to think more about how we create inclusive environments for teaching…
Jo VanEvery 25:49
Yep.
Lucie 25:50
…that recognise that actually students are a diverse pool, and that everyone benefits from having sort of diversity and difference in their assessments, in the ways in which they’re taught, and taught more broadly. So, I think what’s really nice is that there are these pockets to have these conversations about teaching. Although I do also caveat with: I don’t think we talk enough about teaching…
Jo VanEvery 26:21
No, absolutely not. Yes.
Lucie 26:22
…as a profession. One of the things I used to love about Twitter / X was the fact that actually, I think it was far more open as a space to teaching, and to talking about teaching practice, to kind of celebrating and recognising people’s little small wins in the classroom on a weekly basis.
Jo VanEvery 26:42
Yeah.
Lucie 26:42
I don’t think that culture has translated over into Bluesky, which I think is much more kind of focused on the narrative of crisis and the problems within the sector.
Jo VanEvery 26:54
Yeah.
Lucie 26:55
I can, I can see why there’s a, there’s a… Particularly in the British context, there’s a lot of like, kind of, challenges that we’re kind of faced with. But for me, what that does is… If we can’t celebrate our small wins – and it’s often the classroom where we have the most autonomy – if we can’t celebrate that, or feel like it’s recognised, or to show that actually careers can be developed through teaching, then I think we’re doing a disservice to a lot of staff. Because, as you’re aware, I, for instance, have been very teaching focused.
Jo VanEvery 27:32
Yeah.
Lucie 27:33
I’ve often… I’m- I’m research – I would describe myself as ‘research active’, but that is also running in tandem with trying to think about teaching, of being teaching active, and thinking about the classroom.
Jo VanEvery 27:46
And you’re also thinking about the classroom in a scholarly way. Like, it’s not, like, you bring a different mindset to the way you approach teaching. You know? You approach those issues in this, and questions that you have about: “How do I teach this?” – in the same way you approach your research questions, in many ways, right? Like, it’s the same, and I think you’re right. You know?
Jo VanEvery 28:12
And so many, so many people go into academia, and, and want to work in this sector because of teaching, and because… You know… And sometimes, it’s that they’ve been inspired by teachers. Sometimes it’s, you know, there’s a lot of people that are inspired by: “I want to be able to teach better than I was taught. I recognise some things that I really hated about the way that I was taught, and, and I think it could be better, and I want the sector to be better, and it can be very frustrating.” But even if that’s not your primary motivation, it is just a big chunk of the work, right? Even if you’re working at a high prestige – low teaching load institution, teaching still is a big thing in your workload, and and it takes a lot of time. And I think… I think not- not talking about it, and not recognising, like you say, those small wins, and not recognising, you know, the things that happen in the classroom, as you know, is a real detriment.
Jo VanEvery 29:28
And in relation to the current crisis, I think it also means we don’t have a really nuanced way of responding to some of the ways that teaching is being treated in institutions that are undergoing financial crisis, right? Like we’re seeing institutions reducing the number of options they’re offering, requiring people to teach in more generic ways, all that, all that kind of thing, and and I think that is partly. You know, not that it’s our fault; it’s their fault. Absolutely, but that’s partly made possible by the fact that we don’t have this rich conversation about what teaching is and could could could be.
Lucie 30:14
I also think one of the problems we have as a sector – and obviously, I’m grossly generalising – is, I think we’ve binarized research and teaching.
Jo VanEvery 30:24
Oh, absolutely.
Lucie 30:25
We don’t…
Jo VanEvery 30:25
Yeah.
Lucie 30:26
We don’t accept the idea that actually teaching and research are kind of one and the same thing because we, as researchers, go into the classroom. So it’s our kind of methods, our approaches, our processes that we’re sharing with our students. It might sometimes be the case that we are directly sharing our research, but our research identity is far more than just the articles and books that we produce.
Lucie 30:59
I think one of the really sad things about teaching in university is the way that we often see it as taking away from research time, and yet I I believe that in some ways the frustration of that comes because we are so dogged by an institutional context that means that we are are seen as producers of outputs, and those outputs should only be research outputs if we’re thinking about our identity. Whereas for me, I write about my teaching because I have lived experience of my teaching, and we are all – we all have auto-ethnographic observations and perspectives around teaching. Like, we don’t need to become educationists to write about teaching. But it’s curious to me that as a sector, we only see the value if – of writing – if we can say it’s about intellectual academic [writing]. And so that’s kind of like a mindset that even we put onto our students, because we only see the value in the mindset of the essay, or the kind of like, long prose piece of work that brings about conversations from other academics. Whereas I think we could be doing more to actually showcase our research, whether or not that be a sort of message on social media, or an article, or a blog. You know, the disappearance of blogs is to me really sad.
Jo VanEvery 31:22
Yeah.
Lucie 31:22
It used to feel, like, you used to, like, open up social media, and someone had, would have written a blog, and it used to feel so exciting, and you felt felt like your brain was tingling. And now I don’t think that’s what social media does at all, because it’s just about kind of like sucking you into these…
Jo VanEvery 32:57
Yeah, yeah. And some of it…
Lucie 32:58
…discussions about crisis.
Jo VanEvery 33:00
I mean, I think some people are still blogging. Some people are more… I’m hearing more people talking about missing that. And also I think some people are using podcasts to have those conversations. So, you know, although I talked to Anna Law about you know in the August podcast a lot about her process, and writing the book, and how that fit, and the time, how she found time, and what kind of career she’s had, and whatever, because that’s kind of my focus. She’s done a lot of podcast interviews about her book and about the content of the book and about all of that kind of thing in a way that I think 10 years ago people might have just – they might have been blog posts, right, about things in the book. So, I think part of it is just that. And there are people doing some interesting things with video, though I- I don’t understand why anybody has the time to try and face- how to deal with the YouTube algorithm in order to… You know? Because that’s- that’s a whole thing. But that might just be me being old. Not really want[ing] to… There’s some things I just don’t want to figure out. I feel like I can get away without that.
Jo VanEvery 34:08
But I think you’re right. And I have thought that about the kind of artificial separation of research and teaching, and the ways in which some people talk about – I mean, people will talk about research-led teaching, but they don’t really specify very much about what that means. There is a very narrow version of that, that does get talked about, in which people talk about being able to teach, and, and, you know, assign the things they’re reading for their research to their students, and the conversations they have with their students. I- I always wonder if, when they’re talking about that, they’re really talking about teaching Master’s level students, or PhD level students, or even maybe possibly final year undergraduates. But I think some of those, sort of, star researchers, and the- you know the- you know the people that are teaching at more research focused institutions.
Jo VanEvery 34:54
I think there has also – like, as well as like talking about that split, there’s also, when you look at the pattern, the changing patterns of employment terms and conditions, you can also see that one of the things that’s happened is that the research-focused positions are very much doing the postgraduates, and maybe final year undergraduate teaching, and that the first year teaching is very much contingent people. And so there’s also this sense of “Oh, well the research is only really relevant when you get to these higher levels” as opposed to being something that informs our teaching all the way through.
Jo VanEvery 35:52
And you know when I was teaching over 20 years ago now, there was starting to be this conversation about study skills and introducing study skills and all that kind of thing, and, and, and for first years, that gets talked about in terms of study skills, right? As opposed to, you know, for me when I was teaching a first year sociology class, what I interpreted that as, was: we need these people to make that shift that you’re talking about, from, from thinking of learning as ‘learning a bunch of facts and reproducing them to show that you’ve learned’, you know, what you know, like that, that kind of model to understanding the process by which we produce these things, and [towards] giving them the tools that they need, the skills that they need to be able to do that themselves, right? And and I think that felt very – like, it was good. I really liked how it worked. My colleagues, we were all on board with it.
Jo VanEvery 36:28
But I don’t think that’s become the dominant model. I think what’s happened, for all kinds of reasons, many of which are institutional pressures, and who gets hired to do what, and everything else. And there are some amazing people doing amazing things in those first year classrooms with very little institutional support on really shitty contracts. But the fact is, the institutional and the academic culture is very much, as you say, splitting those things. And the fact that they’re on really shitty contracts for really shitty pay, reinforces the idea that the institution does not value that work. Right? It seems to me like we’re in a capitalist society. The way we value things is by paying people, and if you are paying the people that are doing first year teaching poor wages and putting them on contracts with subsidiary companies so that they don’t get the the same pension benefits. You’re saying these people are not as valuable.
Lucie 37:47
Yeah, and I think it’s it’s really disappointing to kind of see a lot of the practices that are kind of occurring around kind of precarious, sort of, like, members of staff. And you know, I’m really kind of worried about kind of all of these PhD students, and ECRs about the vulnerability of their position in the sector.
Jo VanEvery 38:11
Yeah. Mmhmm.
Lucie 38:12
The other side of that is that I don’t teach with those people because I do the teaching. So when it comes to the skills module, that’s me that’s doing that. So I teach the first year Making History module. We don’t have precarious members of staff employed in in my university, um, in the same way that you would in other parts of the sector I think.
Jo VanEvery 38:38
Which is great.
Lucie 38:39
Yeah, which is great – but it means that historically, and also personally, your experiences of teaching are very different.
Jo VanEvery 38:47
Yeah.
Lucie 38:47
And so, like, you know, it’s kind of… I think one of the challenges of the sector is actually I think to try and understand the diversity of people’s experiences around teaching. I think you can hold certain positions around kind of the research teaching binary if you’re in certain institutions that just don’t happen in post 1992s in the same way that they would in sort of glass universities, or Oxbridge, or Russell Group universities. I would, however, say that one of the things I think that’s really interesting, and I think this is about kind of lived experiences of what it means to be an academic, is that for for me, when it comes to the idea of thinking about skills or processes, I think that has always been a part of what it means to be a disabled person in university education. So I always knew I was dyslexic. I came to university knowing that because I was tested at 15. So I did my GCSEs, A levels, and university career knowing I was dyslexic. And that kind of, I think, being dyslexic did two things. Firstly, I worked with disability support officers as an undergraduate and also as a PhD student as well. And I think what came across to me from that was how unfair the system is at never really revealing how things are supposed to be done, that there was an assumption that everything was learnt through osmosis, or there’s a feeling that sometimes the more reading you do, the better you write, or the better you understand how to structure an essay. “If you just, if you just do more reading.” Like, but actually there are rules, and I still don’t know the rules of the English language, like, I’m not a part of that sort of generation that was taught grammar, or comma, or anything anything like that. So that kind of also meant that I ended up having to rely a lot on my partner and my friends to actually tell me what those rules were. And I think, as an academic, I’ve always been inclined to think about: “Well, how do I make sure that my students understand those rules, or understand the kind of processes?” Because actually, the system is opaque, and I even think it’s opaque, even even for me, like trying to write a book,
Jo VanEvery 41:10
Yeah, absolutely, absolutely.
Lucie 41:25
And I find it really interesting that like the times I’m the most productive at writing my book are often the times when I’m reading about what it means to write books, or I’m listening to podcasts about academic writing, or or I’m just kind of like doing book coaching. Like, I am always having to give myself scaffolded tools to do the book. And I think that’s one of the, for me, as a neurodivergent disabled staff member in the sector, is the biggest challenge, is like: I- I think the book for me has been really hard, because we are so obscure about what it means. Like, even if you read these guides about how to write, it’s always like: “Well, get up early. Structure your day. Do the – do X, Y, and Z.” Like as though it’s like about being productive in writing.
Jo VanEvery 42:22
But also, as if, as if you know what to do, once you… Like if you got up early, and structured your day, and turned up to write, that the part that happens in there is not the part you’re struggling with. But what you’re saying is “Sometimes I want to know…” Like… And I remember because when I started as an undergraduate, I was actually a science student, and then I switched to sociology later. And one of the things that, you know, so I knew how to write a lab report, right? Like, there’s there’s sections to a lab report, and I really brought that to other essay writing because it just was, like, “Okay, well, there’s a structure. I’ll use that.” And I think, you know, like, like you say, it’s like, well, that’s a place to start, and having a template is a place to start. And sometimes you need somebody to provide that for you. And that’s not… Like, why do we treat that as “oh somehow you’re not smart enough to figure it out for yourself?” Like, it’s just… Whereas one of the things… My daughter has an ADHD diagnosis, and one of the things she frequently says is, “But one of the things about ADHD is you’re really good at pattern recognition. So when she was like six, she could write properly punctuated dialogue because she read a lot, right? And she did just learn it by osmosis, because part of how her brain works is the pattern recognition. But if you’re dyslexic, your brain works in a different way, right? And you don’t necessarily see all that, or it’s… So… You know? I’m not… I don’t know how… Like, I don’t- I’m not dyslexic, so I don’t know exactly [know] how that- how that works, and how that experience that. But we somehow kind of expect: “Oh everybody [who], if you read a lot, just recognises the patterns and is able to reproduce them.” But that’s not actually true, even if some people do. Right? And we’re rewarding people for things that are not evidence of their, of what we’ve taught them, necessarily. I mean, I think that’s the other thing is the the the lack of conversation around what assessment means, right? Like, you’re creating these new assessments, and partly it’s about: “How do I get people thinking? And how do I get people being vulnerable about the developmental process, so that they can figure stuff out, and learn, and become what I want them to be?”
Lucie 44:46
Yeah, and it’s kind of interesting actually, because I think, I think now we’re talking as a sector more about the end product because we’re talking about AI. And so, like, what’s been really curious to me about the sort of, like, discussion around teaching more recently is: “How can we trust our students to actually [be] producing the things that they claim to be producing?” And that’s, for me, one of the reasons I think we as a sector need to talk more about the innovation that we bring into the classroom, because the narrative of teaching is too much about distrusting the student from the very beginning, that what they’re submitting isn’t their work. But I find it really fascinating, because I can remember for a very long time, people who have been talking about inclusive teaching practices have always said that: “We should be assessing students around processes of learning” – because actually, like, some students might be the hardest working students in the classroom, but they might not be the student that writes the essay that you expect them to write. And so, there’s been an assumption that, like, “Wouldn’t it be great if we could start talking about, you know, self-reflective journals?” – all that sort of stuff. And now we’re starting to talk about it, but [largely] because we found that AI has become a barrier to the end product.
Jo VanEvery 45:55
Yeah.
Lucie 45:57
And I, and I think we do need to start thinking about, kind of, like, actually how we test things, sort of, like, throughout the semester. Not… And that might be weekly, with students doing reading reports that aren’t about analysing an article. It’s more about things that they – where they might be talking about what they liked, what they didn’t. You know? Centering the student process, or lots of other ways in which we could be doing that. And I hope that that is some of the direction that we go in. Because for me, like, the hardest part of being an academic, and the things I think my students struggle with are the processes.
Jo VanEvery 46:45
Absolutely.
Lucie 46:45
And it’s about, kind of, like, actually saying “You’re doing a really good job”. And actually, you’re sort of approaching this more like a developmental kind of staging, rather than the idea that actually – you give them the content, they go off and write an essay. Well, actually: why don’t we reward? [Then] Oh, you’ve made an incremental, an incremental kind of learning, like experience.
Jo VanEvery 47:10
Yeah, yeah.
Lucie 47:11
I think the journey matters more.
Jo VanEvery 47:13
I do too.
Lucie 47:15
I think academics and lecturers are not very good at understanding that the journey is really important. Even if the journey becomes about frustration and barriers, as much as about kind of, like, being, and developing something that is a new way of thinking, or yeah, for students and for academics.
Jo VanEvery 47:35
Yeah. Well, and developing a new way of thinking is frustrating, when you’re…
Lucie 47:40
Yeah, it is.
Jo VanEvery 47:41
Right? You know what I mean? Like, it’s, it’s kind of, like, you know? And how many, how many people who, who… You know, I think this is one of the, one of the kind of things is that some people, you know, the… I sometimes think that it’s actually a barrier to doing this well, if you were the kind of person that always got A’s. Right? Because, because, because you didn’t… You know, you might not have… Right? Like, you talk about, you know, dealing with, you know, working out how to do this with dyslexia, helped you see some of the what’s under the hood. And how: “What do I have to do in order to be able to do this well?” And you obviously are very capable of doing historical research, and writing, and teaching, or you wouldn’t be in the job that you’re in, right.
Jo VanEvery 48:29
But for some people, and you know, it’s like, well, we just… If you just are good at things… But then what happens is when that gets rewarded a lot, I know a lot of people who are, like, “Well, when I try something new, and I’m not good at it right away, I just give up.” And, and they start to recognise in adulthood, that that’s not necessarily a good thing. And so there has started to become little pockets of conversation about the value of learning things that you don’t need to get good at, and doing classes. I think I saw a whole big thread on Bluesky yesterday with somebody talking about how they like to take classes just regularly as a sort of leisure activity in – and and [they] allow themselves to be kind of mediocre at certain things for the joy of doing them, right? Which I think gets back to your thing about the body, and about learning as this full kind of, you know… It’s not just about memorising facts; it’s about developing, and about doing things, and about just engaging with stuff. And that some of, for some things, we’re going to do that to a standard where we’re really good at it, and we might actually make a living doing it. And for other things, it’s just “oh.” You know? We need… We enjoy, we enjoy… It’s okay to just enjoy it. That it is okay to enjoy learning. It’s okay to enjoy writing, or parts of writing. It’s okay to enjoy… You know, whatever.
Jo VanEvery 49:54
And I, and I think that sort of sense of: “Oh, well, it should be hard. And it should be…” Right. But also, that frustration, that frustration can be part of the enjoyment, right? Like being frustrated, and then figuring out how to overcome that, or what’s going on, is also in itself enjoyable – which we talk about a bit with early learning, like, early years stuff. But somehow, once people are over about, you know 12 years old, we stop thinking about that, and we stop thinking about… One of the people I follow on Twitter [Bluesky] is an early years educator, and I just love the way she talks about education, because you know she is like: “Well, you can’t.” – you know, she’s teaching three year olds, you can’t make those people sit still, right? I mean you can try, but it does not work. That’s not in the nature of a three-year-old. But somehow, for some people, the idea is: well, yes, for three-year-olds, it needs to be about the body, and about movement, and about all this kind of thing. But what you’re develop- you know, they’re develop- the… Viewing them in developmental terms, means it’s like: “Oh, but by the time you’re 10, you should be able to sit still.” – which, you know, all the people with ADHD have suffered from for their entire lives. Now, it’s like, you know, sometimes we learn better if we’re not looking right at the person speaking to us, or we learn – you know, we’re actually listening better. Like, I often find I close my eyes when I’m really trying to understand what someone’s saying to me orally because getting rid of the visual stimulation helps me focus on the auditory input, and you know? But similarly, you know, some people, you know, you know, just the the thing about fidgets, or walking, or you know, whatever… It’s just like you know, sometimes that actually is not distracting you from paying attention, it’s actually supporting you in paying attention. And and for some people, I can’t work with music on in the background, but I know other people can’t work without it. And I saw a great Facebook meme about that, which is like: “No, I have to have the music on to distract the toddler in my brain, so I can focus on the thing I need to do.” [Laughter
Lucie 52:00
Yeah.
Jo VanEvery 52:02
You know?
Lucie 52:03
Yeah, which is why, which is why, like, one of the things I’ve really leaned into, is this kind of relaxed pedagogy. But also – which is inviting you to kind of, you know, dismantle some of those kind of rules. And something like this, is plenary procedures of the classroom that students come in with. So I don’t mind students eating or drinking or getting up and going to the toilet. Or, you know, I do invite them to move around, but they don’t actually do it. The other side of it is that I really love like, [Cate] Denials’ idea of like “A Pedagogy of Kindness”. That’s about being kind to yourself, and it’s also about being sort of, like, kind to your students. And I think that’s a really important kind of like value.
Lucie 52:53
And I suppose kind of like one of the things, like talking about creating the career that you have, is I’ve really kind of actually had to sit a lot with what my values are, and what my – what it means for me to feel authentic as an academic. And I think sometimes we are over pushed to think that to be an academic you have to be a writer, you have to be intellectual. You have to be kind of like the knowledge producer or all seer. Like, that’s obviously a sort of slight generalisation, but I really kind of, really sort of thought to myself, “Well, what does it mean for me to be authentic?” And that has meant that, like, I have maybe, possibly, overstretched myself in doing the things I want to do. But I think that also speaks a lot about kind of what I think it is to be a lecturer. So rather than kind of latching into these sort of cultural and social ideas about what being a lecturer is, or even like our disciplinary ideas, I think teaching is really important. I think if you’re a researcher, the first people who are going to hear your ideas or your approaches or your methods are your students, and I really enjoy that kind of like reciprocal nature that you can have with them by developing kind of a sort of space that they can come into, where they feel they can share their ideas, or they feel that they are sort of there, and it’s not high stakes. And that’s what I always want students to feel when they come into the classroom.
Lucie 54:31
And I really love research. Like I am always researching. Like, I’m… And there’s a historian called William Acton in the 19th century where he was always researching and never wrote his book, and I definitely think I’m probably that 21st century version of him in the sense that, like, I really find joy in researching, and I do, I do do my writing, but what I’ve also started to realise is it’s kind about authentic product. So I have a desperate desire to write my book. I will write my book, but I also really just love writing articles. Articles are a really easy tool for me. Like, like I’ve had more than one academic say to me, “You know how to write articles. It’s really clear that you get what an article should and shouldn’t be doing.” And I… That’s my favourite type of writing. And my favourite type of writing is always looking at a collection of small sources. So if you look at my writing for articles, it’s always about smallness. It’s always about kind of like 80 photographs, 60 letters, one diary, one letter book, and then pulling out of that and sort of like thinking about kind of the details, and kind of what you can get from that, either at an organisational level, or kind of more widely. And the problem is, I’m always trying to do that with my book. And that’s what I mean by the fact that we’re not very clear about saying, “Well, this is what a history book is.”
Jo VanEvery 56:07
Yeah.
Jo VanEvery 56:08
Because actually, like what I’ve typically tended to do with that is run run off with the detail, and so I’ve got this like encyclopaedic knowledge of what I want to put in my book, and now the hard part is knowing: “Well, how do you structure it when you know so much?” And: “How do you not get lost in the detail of a story? And what stories are the most important?” So that’s what I’m kind of like grappling with a lot. But I think because I’m always kind of like aware that you’re, I’m grappling with the book. It’s made me really sensitive to the idea that actually doing, doing research, doing a degree is really hard.
Jo VanEvery 56:50
Yeah.
Lucie 56:51
It’s not easy. So I kind of like have a lot of empathy for students around kind of those processes, and I love kind of like dissertation supervision of my third years, because I get to kind of encourage them to think about their sort of processes, and also recognise that it’s very challenging.
Lucie 57:10
But I’ve also increasingly started to think through this work that I’ve done with disabled and neurodivergent researchers, how kind of like, we create a lot of structural barriers within the culture of research around what it means to be an academic. So, like for me, I personally feel that historians overvalue the book…
Jo VanEvery 57:34
Yes.
Lucie 57:35
…as as as the tool of credibility of being able to say: “Yes. I’m a historian. Therefore, I wrote the definitive book on this topic.” Yeah, and what I’ve increasingly started to like kind of really lean into was something that you said when we did book coaching was this idea that historians are really bad at thinking about their research as a sort of kind of like process and a product, so it’s like historians will always just say, “I’m writing the book. I’m writing a book, a book, a book. So when you talk to anyone, it’s always about the book. So I really kind of leaned more into the idea of like, “Well, if I’m writing, what am what am I now writing for? Like it might be the end goal to understand the book, but it doesn’t have to feel like it’s always for the book,
Jo VanEvery 57:56
Yeah.
Lucie 57:47
And what I’ve increasingly started to, like, kind of really lean into was something that you said when we did book coaching, was this idea that historians are really bad at thinking about their research as a sort of kind of like process and a product. So it’s like, historians will always just say, “I’m writing the book. I’m writing a book, a book, a book.” So when you talk to anyone, it’s always about the book. So I really, kind of leaned more into the idea of, like, “Well, if I’m writing, what am- what am I now writing for?” Like, it might be the end goal to understand the book, but it doesn’t have to feel like it’s always for the book.
Jo VanEvery 58:23
Right. If
Lucie 58:24
If you can, kind of, get what I mean? Which is why I think I’m much more happy writing about teaching. Well, not – I don’t say I’m happier writing about teaching. I think that’s *one* of the reasons why I write my teaching stuff, or why I want to think about teaching. Because actually, it’s not an “and/or” question to me. Writing is just writing. And I love- I love writing, writing my thoughts, and writing my processes. And so…
Jo VanEvery 58:52
Well, and and then using that, like forming that into something you can share with someone else, helps you kind of organise your thoughts and processes. Like it, that’s the process through which you create knowledge, which is not just a bunch of facts, but actually… Right? Yeah, something. And it’s even like
Lucie 59:08
Yeah.
Jo VanEvery 59:09
Or something beyond that.
Jo VanEvery 59:09
And it’s even, like… Yeah, and it’s even like, these, and creative workshop- creative history in the classroom workshops that we did – that’s now a special issue, and I wrote an introduction for that, which I really loved writing. It really helped me sort of like really lean into thinking about “Well, what am I doing with this? Why? Why creativity? Like why does it matter to me so much?” And then obviously, it’s a special issue that I’ve got some amazing articles by other academics talking about the creative process in their teaching and learning. And I think that’s one of the things I think as a historian, I’m always really keen on thinking about is disseminating the kind of real vision of what it means to be an academic. So I’m always slowly working on the book. But I’m also really keen to have people recognise, or offer a perspective that: You *can* talk about teaching…
Jo VanEvery 1:00:10
Yeah
Lucie 1:00:10
…and it can be a part of your career identity. And that might be because at the end of the day, you know, we spoke about precarious members of staff, but we’re also seeing a sector that is starting to create teaching-only jobs.
Jo VanEvery 1:00:23
Yeah.
Lucie 1:00:23
And you know, I I’m really worried about that just as much as precarity because I think that means that we’re sort of like kind of not showcasing what actually we would like our teaching-focused members of staff to be publishing on. Because what we still see is people saying: “I’m still doing my research. I’m just teaching.”
Jo VanEvery 1:00:47
Yeah. And also, yeah, yeah, and… But then also, the fact that even if you weren’t writing and publishing about teaching, if you were writing and – that the scholarship you’re doing on your research, like the work you’re doing on the settlement movement, and related things, right, is also informing your teaching, right? Both in in the content, in the methods, in all of that kind of thing, and that being an active researcher is something that informs how you teach and what you’re trying to teach students to be able to do. I used to, I used to explicitly say to students, it’s like: “You’re doing the same thing we’re doing. You’re just a novice.” Right? So we’re not expecting you to produce the kind of thing that we, as professional researchers, are producing. But you are, you are producing a novice version of the same kind of thing, right? It’s not a different thing, and, and in order for that to be, right, like, that kind of seems to me [to] also [be] kind of what you’re doing, right? You’re seeing students as novice historical researchers, and you’re teaching them the skills they need as beginners, and helping them figure out how they are going to do it, and all of that kind of thing, which is amazing. Yeah.
Lucie 1:02:05
I think the thing is, is like what’s really interesting to me is, I think so many people are doing that.
Jo VanEvery 1:02:10
Yeah.
Lucie 1:02:10
I just don’t think we are modelling yet, what we want to do with that innovation.
Jo VanEvery 1:02:18
Yeah.
Lucie 1:02:19
Because at the moment, it’s almost like good teaching stays in the classroom. And I think good teaching needs to be shared – partly because of these kind of pressures that that the sector is under. Like, you know, I’ve I think you know research is so important; it’s a cornerstone of what it means to be in a university. Universities are supposed to be research spaces.
Jo VanEvery 1:02:43
Yeah.
Lucie 1:02:43
That’s their, like, that’s their uniqueness. But they’re also teaching spaces. And I think – I I just kind of wish we could be braver to say: “Let’s think about how teaching should be disseminated, shared, celebrated better” – as as kind of a sector, but also I think within our own subject areas as well. Because I think a lot of the time when the government is talking to us about teaching, when you look at the profile of the individuals that are in the government, they’re often Oxbridge educated, and that’s no disrespect to my Oxbridge colleagues, but they’ve only had one experience of teaching, and often that was like 15-20 years ago.
Jo VanEvery 1:03:33
Yeah, 15. Yeah.
Lucie 1:03:35
And yet the sector is doing so much more. Like we are, we are like working with our local communities, we are working with the GLAM sector. We’re trying to connect up students with sort of different organisations, but also invite them to be more creative, and innovative, and more critical. And underlining that is – like, hopefully what I hope I’m doing is bringing passion into their studies. So I think we should be showcasing that far more confidently than we than we do now, because otherwise we can’t talk about the value of our subjects if we’re not doing that.
Jo VanEvery 1:04:14
And I think – I think it’s interesting to come back to kind of a little bit where we started, which is that – you’ve done some of your work sharing that through your scholarly association. You’ve been recognised for your teaching by the Royal Historical Society. And I think a lot of people tend to see scholarly associations as about research, and research conferences, and whatever, and that your teaching side is somehow something else. And so, in a way, it’s nice that that particular scholarly association, and probably some others as well, many others as well, is doing at least some work. And that we can use… But that, as individuals – because those associations are associations of scholars, right? Like, it’s not, it’s not like a university where you’ve got a management strategy, and whatever. It’s like, this is your association, and you can use it to do that, right? You can say, you know, “Can we do this under the gist of the association? Can we…?” Right? We can… We could be… You know, like what are we connecting? It is- It is really a place for scholars to connect with other people in their discipline, and in their field, around areas of common interest. And yes, sometimes that’s about your research, and presenting your research in progress, and getting feedback from peers, and sometimes it’s about doing the same thing with: “How do we teach this? How do we…?” Because all of us do, like, everybody working, you know, in the field is in some way, doing some of that. Pretty much.
Jo VanEvery 1:05:42
But I agree with you that there is this real like in the broader kind of structural constraints, the separation of teaching and research, often at the policy level. I mean, I come from Canada, and education in the federal kind of constitutional breakdown is a provincial responsibility, but research sits with the federal, right? So it isn’t even being funded from the same pile of money, and create, and so therefore universities are this very weird thing in relation to that, because some of it, because they have this dual jurisdiction issue. So you get that. You also just get this thing about where you know the increasing focus you know in the current funding environment is that you know pressure on people who are research active to be bringing in money to support the researcher- research and for a lot of people applying for that funding you know they’re like but it needs to: “I need the money to buy me out of teaching”, right? Because you’re already in this bifurcated system where it feels like those things are in competition with each other, and it just creates more and more of this: “Okay, we need some people to do the teaching, and then in order to support a smaller cohort of people who are kind of stars doing this research”, as opposed to this… You know, so we’re losing something in there. And a lot of individuals are not are you know are just trying to like do the best they can in the context that they’re living. I mean, we all are, right? So there are a lot of people that recognise the kinds of things we’ve talked about today and just don’t really know. “Well, what other options do I have?”
Jo VanEvery 1:07:20
And you’ve been lucky to be employed somewhere where you can really focus on your teaching, where you can A) have a job as a historian, and B) get promoted as a historian without having published a book. And where your institution has also recognised your teaching and the work that you’ve been doing around disability and neurodivergence, you know, in ways that might not be possible for other people. Like, you’ve been incredibly lucky to be in that position, but then you’ve also been like, “Oh, well, if this is where I work and I actually I’m going to try and do this and see what…” you know? And you you’ve actually taken that and been like, “I have the option of being able to do it, so I’m gonna… This is where I’m gonna focus, and these are my values, and that’s what’s important.”
Jo VanEvery 1:08:05
We should probably stop. It’s been really important, really interesting to talk to you. Like, it’s just, I think you’re doing such great work, and I really, you know, I like that. And and the, like you say, like, what what is the book? I I don’t know. I hope the book eventually gets published. It’ll be really interesting, but it’s it is a kind of you know…
Lucie 1:08:28
It will!
Jo VanEvery 1:08:28
It will.
Lucie 1:08:28
I’ve got- I’ve got like, 50,000 words now, so it’s definitely…
Jo VanEvery 1:08:30
Awesome. Like that’s really great.
Lucie 1:08:32
Definitely like in the horizon.
Jo VanEvery 1:08:35
Yeah, that’s…
Lucie 1:08:36
I just need to not get distracted by anything else.
Jo VanEvery 1:08:40
But again, that… Like, in one sense, you’ve been able to do what you’ve done, partly because you got, you know, the job you got, and the institutional location you’re in enables [you], you know, and supports you to a certain extent. And if it’s not supporting you, at least [it] isn’t impeding you from doing this, right? Nobody’s telling you, “Oh, you can’t do that.”
Jo VanEvery 1:08:58
So, what would you say to people who share some of your values, and who maybe want to be doing more of this? Like, maybe just small things that, you know… Do you have any advice for people? Knowing that, you know, they might not be able to take it, because their situation is different, but that it might be worth, you know, like, if they, if they’re thinking, “Oh, I’d really love to be able to do that”, like, what kinds of things could they be thinking about doing?
Lucie 1:09:26
I think what people should do is just sit down and ask themselves: What are their values?
Jo VanEvery 1:09:33
Yeah.
Lucie 1:09:34
Just kind of, like, you know: Pause. Mindset. And think about what they want to actually kind of like, bring to the table, or what they would like to be on the table is really important. I also think that like, this is like where my career, I think, is interesting because I started off with a very high teaching load. Like it was really, really, really high. Like, I don’t know how I survived it at the beginning, to be honest. And so, what that really kind of did was it meant that I think we don’t talk enough about life cycles in the sector, which is that it is always really hard at the very beginning. And I know that there’s a lot of pressure, particularly for tenure track colleagues, to try and like produce. But actually to start thinking a bit about: “What can I achieve?” – not: “What needs to be done?” I think just framing that as a mindset is really important, because I think when you’re too much about chasing what needs to be done, and panicking about it, you can’t actually do anything because it becomes really stressful. So I would kind of, like, encourage people to kind of lean in to, maybe – although I hate that term, “lean in” – I would perhaps encourage people to actually sort of just pause, and think about what is achievable, and isn’t going to break me whilst I’m developing teaching, or have a high teaching load. And that might mean actually asking whether or not something you’re doing in your teaching, can be the focus of what you’re kind of doing and thinking about, in terms of publications.
Jo VanEvery 1:11:12
Yeah.
Lucie 1:11:12
…is what I’d say.
Jo VanEvery 1:11:13
Yeah. So really pausing and not chasing, not chasing somebody else’s ideas of what you should be doing, but kind of looking at: “Okay, how much capacity do I have?” Right? “This is my teaching load. These are the demands on me. How much capacity do I have? Time, cognitive capacity, strengths that I bring…”
Lucie 1:11:36
Yeah, because I…
Jo VanEvery 1:11:37
…er, values that I have. All of those things together, and then: “Okay, where- what are what am I able to accomplish given in the circumstances I’m in?”
Lucie 1:11:47
I mean, I think when you have a binary between research and teaching, it means that you’re always looking, when you’re teaching, to research, and thinking “I’m failing because I’m not doing my research” – but actually that’s just sometimes a junction of your career. And rather than kind of getting stressed about that, think about kind of, sort of, like, quicker, easier wins, which might be writing about your research, [or] thinking about doing something small, in terms of your research. So, like I, one of my favourite articles I wrote in six weeks, and that was a very small, focused article.
Lucie 1:12:23
And then the other side of it is just producing stuff about your teaching, even if it’s about you talking about how your teaching is research informed. So you kind of knit and join it together. Just- I just think there’s so much pressure all the time to be thinking “I’m not doing my research, I’m not doing my research, I’m not doing my research” – when, in actual fact, to survive and also to create meaning in your academic identity, you do sometimes just have to be in the teaching, in the teaching route.
Jo VanEvery 1:12:54
Yeah.
Lucie 1:12:54
And you know, obviously, Jo, you know me. Another thing to say is sign up for writing. Meeting with your Writing.
Jo VanEvery 1:13:02
Yes, one of the reasons I know about what Lucie’s doing is because she comes to a Meeting With Your Writing. And you know, and even if what you’re writing about is your teaching, like, it doesn’t [matter]. Right? It just means that you’re having time to do some writing, and reflecting, and do some stuff. So, like, that’s a way of blocking time in what you’re doing.
Lucie 1:13:20
And I’ve been coming to Meeting With Your Writing for so long, that I remember, that I remember that you used to have to call in.
Jo VanEvery 1:13:27
On the phone! Oh, yeah!
Lucie 1:13:28
On the phone. So… And that, and that, like, you know, established… I’m such a long serving member of that group.
Jo VanEvery 1:13:34
Yeah. No, I’ve been doing it… We’re starting the… It’ll be- it’s 14 years in September! So we’re going into the 15th year of Meeting With Your Writing.
Lucie 1:13:36
Ooh!
Jo VanEvery 1:13:38
And I did try and find whether I still had a list of people who were in the first cohort, and I’m not sure I did, but there are still… There’s still at least one person’s there, that was there maybe 12 years ago, plus several people who were her graduate students, and are now academics themselves.
Lucie 1:14:03
Oh wow, that’s really cool! I think I coming up to 10 years.
Jo VanEvery 1:14:05
Like I’ve got generations, there’s generations of people, right? So…
Lucie 1:14:08
I think I’m definitely coming up to 10 years.
Jo VanEvery 1:14:10
Yeah, yeah.
Lucie 1:14:12
Amazing. Thank you very much!
Jo VanEvery 1:14:13
Okay, so I think we’ve talked for over an hour, probably. I don’t know. Like, my assistant keeps reminding me that people listen to my podcast and therefore they’re okay with listening to what we’re talking about for an hour, and I think we’ve had a really interesting conversation. And maybe they’re going for a long run, or you know, doing, doing gardening or something while they’re listening. I don’t know. Thank you for the people that are still listening.
Jo VanEvery 1:14:37
So I think as much as we could continue to talk about so many things. It was really nice of you to talk to me about the creative history, which is completely interwoven with your experience of neurodivergence and disability as an academic. And so, I think people get a really good sense of how you can bring that, and trying to understand how to be who you are, with the way your brain works in this environment. [And how it] sometimes has these interesting… Like yes, it’s difficult. Yes, it’s a disabling environment, but also it helps you see things and do things like differently in ways that can be really productive and creative and interesting. So I’m really glad about that.
Jo VanEvery 1:15:21
After we get off this call, I would like you to share the details of that special issue, so we can put it in in the show notes for people to find if they’re interested in learning more about what came out of those creative history workshops or teaching history creatively workshops. If you would like to be found, and maybe if there are people that would like to maybe try and start conversations in small ways, like the old Twitter, about what you’ve done in your teaching this week or whatever on Blue Sky. Lucie’s on Blue Sky. Where else? Where else can people find you if you want to be found?
Lucie 1:15:57
I’m also on LinkedIn. Yeah, with my full name, which is Lucinda Matthews Jones,
Jo VanEvery 1:16:03
Right. Okay. And do you post much there, or..?
Lucie 1:16:07
Yeah, yeah, I do. I very, I’ve very much leaned into the kind of, like, you know, positivity of LinkedIn.
Jo VanEvery 1:16:16
Yeah, I’ve I’ve been enjoying it. Um, like I’ve just decided I I don’t need to do it. I think I’ve taken the same approach you’ve taken to the teaching, right? Which is: we don’t have to do this the way everybody says we have to do it. We can be like, what… How do we want this to be? And who are we? And who do we want to be here? And, and, do that, and then we can talk to other people. And there are some really interesting people doing cool things around, around this stuff, so, and, and you can write more on in a LinkedIn post than you can in Bluesky. Like, it’s just that long form helps sometimes, right?
Lucie 1:16:49
Yeah, definitely.
Jo VanEvery 1:16:50
I don’t have any idea what their algorithm, like how their algorithm works, but okay. So you’re on Bluesky and LinkedIn, and we will put all those links in the show notes. So thank you very much.
Lucie 1:17:03
Thanks very much.
[End of Transcript.]
