CHAPTER 8.-SPECIAL PROBLEMS OF THE SPLIT APPOINTMENT

"Hey Tom, I hear that you are coaching swimming. What are you doing, giving up teaching?"

"No, I have a split appointment."

"How do you find the time for everything?"

"I get up earlier in the morning, work later at night, and have a research assistant."

"Does it interfere with research and writing?"

"No, but it shoots the weekends and cuts down on vacations."

"What does your family think of your coaching?"

"Nobody likes to hear the alarm go off early in the morning. I sometimes think the kids don't know me anymore. Last night when I came home around 11 o'clock, the dog growled at me."

"Say Tom, if you had to choose between coaching and teaching, which would you pick?"

"I really don't know."

**********

Sometimes when an individual occupies a particular role in an organization there are different social expectations held by others of what he or she should do. A situation in which there are incongruent social demands is called role conflict. There are four possible types of conflict.

First is intersender conflict -- individual A, who occupies the role, and individual B do not share similar expectations about what individual A should do. For instance, teachers of academic courses or physical education instructors who are required by school principals or departmental chairpersons to coach often express the sentiment that they are overburdened or overworked. They claim they would rather just teach.

Second is intrasender conflict -- individual A receives mixed messages from individual B about what should be done in a given role. For example, if a chairperson of a physical education department requires a coach to take responsibility for another sport besides swimming, but fails to assign priorities as to which is more important, the role conflict may follow.

Third is person-role conflict -- expectations of the role violate the personal beliefs or values of the job holder. For instance, a coach fearful of losing the job may pressure athletes to take shortcuts in studying or try to get professors to change grades to maintain eligibility. If such actions violate a personal belief that students should strive for academic excellence, and not merely survive, then person-role conflict may result.

Fourth is inter-role conflict--individual A occupies two or more roles in the same organization or in different social relationships, thus the demands of these different roles create competing cross-pressures with which the individual must cope. For instance, when a man acts as father/teacher/coach, or a woman acts as mother/professor/coach, then the various pressures of childrearing, lecturing and grading exams, as well as counseling numerous swimmers with personal problems may require a lot of juggling in one's daily schedule (Decker 1986).

Instead of role conflict another possibility exists. Sometimes an individual faces multiple pressures simply in trying to comply with the multiple expectations attached to a role. This condition is called role strain. For instance, a coach may face simultaneous demands from others--such as the faculty, administration, students, or athletes--to perform various aspects of the job better.

The coach who is also a high school teacher of academic courses, or is a physical education instructor, or is a college professor may experience various types of role conflict or strain. Generally, persons who have entered coaching at the request or demand of others (structural motive) rather than because they wanted to (personal motive) experience high levels of role conflict. Individuals who coach because they have volunteered generally express low levels of role conflict.

Similarly, coaches who prefer a single role of academic teacher, physical education instructor, or coach of a single sport both occupy a split appointment experience higher role conflict than individuals who voluntarily have sought out a split appointment.

In secondary schools, female teacher/coaches show higher levels of role conflict than the male teacher/coaches (Gehrke 1982). In college, there are no clear-cut differences between female and male teacher/coaches (Massengale and Locke 1976). It is not clear why inter-role conflict is more noticeable for females in high school than in college. Perhaps teaching and coaching activities tend to take more time in high school than in college since the high school day is more fully scheduled than in college. If teaching and coaching in high school were more time demanding, then married females would traditionally experience greater pressure to resolve inter-role conflict between family and school in favor of the family. Such a resolution typically would mean dropping out of coaching. Individuals who are college physical education instructors and coaches, or those who are professor and coach in college perhaps probably have sufficient past experience in such a dual role to know how to cope with potential role strains and conflicts.

Although some research is available on sources and correlates of role conflict among high school and college coaches, the strategies of coping usually are not discussed in any detail. Thus, the role conflicts and strains at home and at work as experienced by the professor/coach are examined.

Dealing with the family

The position of coach, like any other job, generates role conflict. As coach there are multiple obligations that have to be fulfilled. One's roles of coach and of spouse/parent generate conflict. Perhaps the major conflict involves different time schedules. Coaches for the better part of the year have to get up early (4:30 - 5:00 AM) to arrive at morning workouts on time. When the alarm goes off and the coach stumbles out of bed, the partner's sleep is disturbed. If the spouse does not need to get up, a pattern of disturbed sleep leads to fatigue, and perhaps resentment. At the other end of the day, the coach usually retires exceptionally early. Often the spouse stays up alone. This pattern also may persist on weekends. Again, resentment may surface.

Early departures and late arrivals following evening and morning practices or late night recruitment telephone calls or visits also play havoc with meal schedules. Since meal time is often the only occasion for parents and children to interact, especially in families with school-aged children or where both spouses work, the coach's absence often leaves much of the parenting to the other spouse. On those occasions when the family is together and children seek advice from the coach/parent, sometimes the coach is tempted to react to the child as just another member of the squad. Strategies learned in dealing with the athlete to maintain control, to manipulate, or effect emotional distance may get repeated when dealing with the child. The lessons learned when reacting to the manipulative strategies of athletes may heighten the coach's awareness of the child's attempted ploys. After a time, a certain degree of callousness or cynicism may develop; ploys are ignored or dismissed in a cavalier fashion. When the child tries a ploy and is ignored, the relationship between coach/parent and child becomes strained.

Taking care of the mundane tasks of shopping, going to the dry cleaners, getting the car fixed, and so forth often are complicated if the family has limited means of transportation. Getting to and from early morning practices and late afternoon or evening sessions sometimes may place stress on other members of the family. This type of strain increases as the children reach the ages where they have more activities of their own to attend and places to go, or as the number of drivers increases but the number of cars remains fixed.

Travel for recruitment, to swim meets as an observer or for scheduled competition, and to professional meetings and clinics make further demands on the coach. To compensate for these absences the coach will often spend a lot of time with the family during the off-season. Sometimes the swings from no involvement and inattention to intense involvement and constant attention also create pressures. When one parent is away, the other must pick up more responsibilities in parenting, taking care of chores, and care-giving. When the absentee parent returns, family members need to readjust to the re-allocation of tasks as the absentee resumes the temporarily abandoned roles. Alternating periods of normal role load and role strain for the partner left at home create tensions, especially in negotiating predictable role assignments. For some partners, the ambiguity of who does what and when proves to be too much. The partnership dissolves.

Coping with the faculty

Coaches, when planning the schedule of meets, usually take the NCAA championship meets for men and women as the starting points and work backward through the conference meets to the dual meet season. Practice schedules are usually fixed by a combination of availability of facilities, vacations, and time of final examinations. Although coaches keep an eye on the college or university schedule, if conflicts arise it is left to the athlete to resolve matters with the faculty. Coaches generally treat practice hours as sacred and urge swimmers not to schedule classes that conflict. If a course is required for a major and offered on a limited basis, then a conflict may be permitted. Such decisions usually are made individually. Most coaches presume that missed practices will be made up. Athletes pursuing majors that require a great deal of laboratory or field work that conflicts with practice time often are encouraged to defer enrolling in these courses until spring quarter. During the spring quarter training time is less demanding (unless it is an Olympic year). Sometimes the coach asks the swimmers not to enroll in labs or field placement courses until after completing their eligibility. In many colleges and universities it is common for athletes and non-athletes to take five or perhaps six years before completing a degree. Some educators believe that the four-year degree is going the way of penny candy, the nickel coke, and so forth.

Within any academic community some professors are protagonists of sport; some are antagonists of sport; and some professors do not care at all about sports. The antagonists often stereotype athletes. More often than not the experiences with football and basketball players are used to build the stereotype. The stereotypical athlete is seen as a perfunctory student. They attend class when they are not on the road, or when they feel like it. The athlete relies on others for getting assignments, taking notes, and structuring responses to essay questions or term papers. The athlete depends on a tutor to pre-digest materials. The athlete lacks skills in reading and writing because they have not had the time needed for study and mastery of these skills. To compensate, they hone listening skills. They enroll in easy courses, or courses where "test files" are available. They avoid difficult instructors. The football and basketball players allegedly come from a socioeconomic background where studies are a necessary evil to be endured in order to maintain eligibility and eventually to make it to the pros.

Once a professor identifies a student as an athlete, this negative stereotype is invoked and discrimination begins, even before the individual has had an opportunity to perform for the professor. Characteristically life is made difficult for the athlete. Late papers are deemed unacceptable. No make-up exams are permitted. Absences lower class recitation grades. Pop quizzes are sprung when athletes are missing due to travel.

When good grades are achieved or analytic abilities are demonstrated by an athlete, the professor expresses pleasant surprise and "fences" or marks the individual as an exception to the rule. Fortunately, most swimmers usually come from a social class background where education is valued and they have already developed solid study habits.

Faculty also invoke gender stereotypes against female athletes. Female athletes often complain that certain instructors cast aspersions on their femininity for being a swimmer or a diver. Even after almost one hundred years of heightened consciousness for females, it is the middle-aged female or the foreign female language instructor who remains most vehemently anti-athlete.

Faculty may be involved in a particular sport and are sympathetic to fellow participants. All other sports are treated as boring and outlandish. Participants in these "lesser" activities are not taken as serious athletes. Further, athletes who seriously participate in sports other that the "preferred" one are viewed as displaying a behavior which is incomprehensible. Why would somebody do something as foolish as swim back and forth, going nowhere? Who would be crazy enough to chase a golf ball, only to put it in a hole 9, 18, or x number of times?

Where faculty are antagonistic and/or have little leverage in ensuring that sports do not conflict with the academic timetable, they tend to exercise their authority in the classroom. Coaches and athletes over the years come to recognize which of these faculty are to be avoided. New faculty and graduate assistants may prove to be troublesome until their stance and reputations become known.

The athletes also are quick not only to recognize which faculty are protagonists of sport, but also which courses are easy. Some coaches, instead of simply relying on this informal method of identifying courses, when counseling athletes refer to a detailed file of the "hard" and "easy" professors. When a swimmer is weak academically, or looking for a light quarter or semester, such coaches simply check the file and arrange a light schedule. This paternalistic practice protects the swimmer and may maintain eligibility. Conversely, such paternalism may coddle the athlete to the point that an entire curriculum is watered-down. The student may end up under-prepared and with a virtually worthless degree upon graduation.

Athletic departments and coaches have been castigated, and rightly so, for arranging easy course curricula for athletes. The fact that such a strategy can be effected leads to a broader indictment. It raises fundamental questions: How well are department heads/chairs monitoring the faculty within their departments? Are administrators sensitive to weaker faculty, departments, and programs throughout the institution? Until the opportunity for selecting the easy path has been closed, the practice of paternalistic course selection will probably continue.⁽¹⁾

For coaches who hold a split appointment as professor/coach an issue that must be resolved is: What is the relative emphasis to be placed on academics and sports when advising the student-athletes? Acting as a faculty member, the individual automatically assumes that studies take precedence. The standard list of reasons are easily recited when advising student-athletes on scholastic matters. As one becomes more mature as a scholar, the professor has more to offer the student. The professor also demands more, unless some perspective is maintained on just how much material a class can master within the time frame of a quarter or semester.

While acting as a coach, it is easy to assume that athletics take precedence; after all, job security is tied to the performance of the athletes. As the coach becomes more experienced one becomes more technically proficient and incorporates more refinements into the program, thereby placing increased demands on the athletes. To reconcile these cross-pressures, the professor/coach must take the stance that while acting in either role, all one can do is act as a facilitator. The ultimate decision on how priorities are set rests with the student-athlete. Although the professor/coach can offer an opinion on how priorities are structured, especially if they are ill-conceived and may have a detrimental effect on the athlete, the mentor must recognize that it is ultimately the student-athlete who is responsible.

Professor/coach as split appointment

Administrators in institutions that have highly competitive athletic programs are reluctant to hire coaches as split appointments with responsibilities as professor/coach. There are administrative pressures to avoid split appointments. In order to hire an individual who serves as a coach and faculty member, credentials have to be approved by both the athletic department and the academic department where one will teach. Both sets of administrators and faculty, as well as athletes and students, will have to meet the candidate during the interview process. Administrative approval involves both chains of command; salary has to be okayed in two budget reviews. If the candidate has tenure as a faculty member and is hired as a coach, then a potential problem arises: What action should be taken if the individual serving as the coach gets fired? The academic department may be forced to add the individual as a fully tenured faculty member. Therefore, the academic department is reluctant to accept the individual on a tenure track since academic departments do not want to lose any degrees of freedom in tenuring faculty. Also tenured faculty with increased experience and rank become more costly to the institution. As costs increase each department strives more diligently to avoid the responsibility of paying any portion or the entire salary of the split appointment.

In institutions open to the possibility of hiring split appointments administrators make the following assumptions. First, they assume that the professor/coach is competent in both areas. Second, they assume that the individual can fulfill both types of job demands without experiencing conflict. Third, both teaching and coaching require the same communication role skills. Fourth, both teaching and coaching require technical skills with the latter usually being more applied. Fifth, they assume that the individual is equally interested in both jobs (Chu 1981 suggested points 2, 4, and 5). Chu, reporting on his own research on teacher/coaches, suggests that males holding split appointments expend approximately triple the time in coaching that they do in teaching. Females in similar positions spend almost twice the time in coaching that they do in teaching. Chu (1981: 162) argues that the roles are distinct and most people prefer coaching over teaching.

Clearly, professor/coach is a time-consuming occupation. For the coach in the more competitive program, there is greater pressure to expend more time in preparation, whether it is recruiting, reading the professional literature, or keeping up with the flow of paper work in the daily routine. The nature of the pressure also mounts as one moves from the position of volunteer coach to paid coach, and from an assistant coach to a head coach. As a volunteer one's tasks are quite limited. The head coach recognizes that other roles take precedence over coaching. Coaching responsibilities are assigned to ensure that a balance is maintained; after all, the head coach does not want to lose free help. Once the individual moves into a paid position, the job description becomes fixed. One is expected to expend the time and energy necessary to carry out assigned duties.

As an assistant coach, role demands are not quite as pressure-packed as those of a head coach. The individual moves from a position of fairly specific sets of obligations to a position with an expanded number of demands. As a head coach the responsibilities multiply even more.

The typical role cluster as a faculty member includes the responsibilities of teaching, conducting research and publication, holding student conferences, directing theses, and doing committee work. As a volunteer coach, there is time available to fulfill obligations in both teaching and coaching. As a paid assistant coach holding a split appointment, negotiations may be needed for release from certain areas of responsibility or at least reduced expectations. As a head coach, such negotiations are mandatory. Moreover faculty may view the role of "coach" differently, depending on the nature of the commitment. In the case of a volunteer coach, faculty may express the view that the individual is merely acting out one's fantasy or developing a stronger leisure time identity. In the case of a paid coach, be it assistant or head coach, the faculty may see the position as an integral part of the person's career development. The more time that is spent as a coach, the more likely that the affected faculty will express a concern over which career may eventually be chosen. It is easier to generate faculty and athletic department support for a split appointment as an assistant than as a head coach.⁽²⁾

Similarly, in athletic departments that pride themselves as being highly competitive (NCAA I and sometimes NCAA II schools) there is some reluctance to define the head coaching position as a split appointment. At the college level, in many NCAA III or NAIA schools, generally there is less emphasis on producing top-flight programs and elite performers. Historically, there has been a greater acceptance of the split appointment for the head coach.

The individual who aspires to occupational success as either professor or coach, or both must be organized and capable of handling pressure. With experience, the individual holding a split appointment becomes increasingly proficient in conducting coaching and professorial roles. Most situations that earlier involved any role conflict have been resolved or accommodations negotiated.

Interestingly, faculty view the roles of volunteer, assistant, and head coach differently in the commitment required and prestige granted. If a professor is serving as a volunteer coach, other faculty tend to see the commitment as "low key." The role is viewed as providing a break from the pressures of work. It is part of the leisure-time identity of an individual. The volunteer position is seen as a form of service to the university or college community, noteworthy as an altruistic action, but little else.

An assistant coach, if receiving remuneration--pay, release time, or equipment--is taken more seriously by faculty colleagues. The commitment of time is greater and the background and training of the individual presumably is better than that of the volunteer. In regions of the United States and in schools where sports are highly valued, the assistant coach accrues a modicum of prestige. But in regions where sports are seen as "play breaks" from work or leisure time activities, coaching is a low prestige occupation. The designation of "coach" may be bandied about in conversations or in greetings, but usually is done so in a tongue-in-cheek manner.

When an individual occupies the position of head coach, then the individual is viewed by academic colleagues as holding two full-time jobs. The individual takes on the identity of coach and all the trappings of office. The level of prestige attached to the position in part flows from how competitive the program is and its reputation. The smaller the program's size, the lower its reputation,and the less competitive, generally the less prestige is attached to the coaching position. Conversely, as these factors increase, so does the prestige accrued. Unless a coach is involved in a highly competitive program, one is perceived as having a great deal of free time. But one who coaches and has some other job is seen as fully employed. If both jobs are viewed as time consuming, then the individual is seen by friends as over-committed and "different."

A misperception among friends and colleagues that sometimes follows one's entry into coaching is that the coach automatically becomes knowledgeable on how to cope with a variety of sports-based injuries. Friends may ask for diagnoses and suggested therapies. The coach must always preface any replies with the standard admonition that the individual should check with a doctor.

Strategies for coping as a split appointment

Individuals may follow a number of strategies for reducing role strain or role conflict (Massengale 1981). Four are identified in this section.

Neutralization.-One way to reduce role strain is to deny the veracity of claims made by others. Coaches in dealing with the array of others--ranging from administrators to fans--often feel that everybody always wants something. To cope with the pressures brought about by demands for changes in behavior, the coach may simply dismiss the request. The dismissal may be prefaced with a remark which undercuts the authority of the other to make moral demands of the coach. For instance, an administrator may request that a coach cease an extra-legal action, some practice that is on the fringes of illegality, but not clearly defined as illegal according to NCAA rules and interpretations. The action in the coach's eyes is one taken by all coaches. Not to follow the practice would place one at a disadvantage. In this circumstance, the coach "blows off" the request claiming: "Why should I do what he says? That person has never coached and doesn't know the problems we face."

A related tactic to ease conflicting demands is to trivialize them. The coach reduces the importance attached to expectations of others. "They don't pay me enough to put up with this amount of grief." The coach reassigns priorities to expected tasks. The coach may argue that: "Others are asking too much of me." In effect, the coach neutralizes the demands of others. The tasks really are not necessary for the satisfactory performance of the jobs. By reducing, dismissing, or eliminating the tasks normally required, the professor/coach reduces the number of cross-pressures to a manageable level.

Massengale (1981) suggests that the strategy for reducing conflict through redefinition and reorganization may also be accomplished at the institutional level. One way to reduce pressure is to change the coach's interpretation of the expectations and the rewards of the job. As long as the job receives low pay, has long hours, lacks security, and lacks credentials then coaches will tend to protect their turf by reducing the pressures exerted by others and to maintain their self-esteem by devaluing the moral claims of others. To alter this perception, the public and the audiences served by the coach must be educated to upgrade the status of the coach. The educational system must improve the reward structure for the job and provide greater job security.

Role switch.-Another strategy for reducing role conflict is to withdraw from the obligations, demands, and duties assigned to one role and embrace those attached to the other. For instance, if the individual holds a coach/professor appointment and finds the demands of academe to be onerous, then the tendency is to reassign one's priorities by defining coaching duties as primary and professorial duties as secondary. This permits withdrawal from committee work, escape from the pressures of publish or perish, and lets one pursue a life style that one may view as more acceptable.

"Super coach."-Another strategy for handling role strain or conflict is for the individual to accommodate to the demands (Massengale [1981] calls this strategy adaptation and compromise.) The split appointee accepts the contradictory pressures or heightened demands, treats them as a challenge, and becomes extremely organized and efficient. One becomes "super coach/super prof" like "super mom." The individual buys a computer to speed scanning of files and records. The coach looks for time-saving ways to handle the daily routine--such as buying an answering machine for both office phone and home; returning calls that accumulate during the day at one time; and handling correspondence by dictation. The individual always solicits assistance for more support personnel in each office (the athletic department and the faculty department). The individual learns how to delegate. The individual with a split appointment tends to mix autocratic and consultative styles of decision-making by placing a lot of emphasis on acquiring the maximum amount of information available in the shortest possible time.

Drop out.-Finally, if all else fails, the individual can drop out of each position and find a new job. If the individual withdraws, no one will be surprised since coaching has a fairly high attrition given the long hours and low pay.

When an individual leaves sports or coaching, a variety of different perspectives are used to account for the move. Earlier accounts portray withdrawal from coaching as a form of "social death" fraught with all the same adjustments that any retiree faces: loss of friends and acquaintances; the severing of ties with professional associations; loss of prestige or reduced self esteem; reduction in salary; and removal from public view. These accounts tend to dwell on the negative aspects of exiting from a job or retiring. More recent accounts simply treat leaving coaching as a status transformation, moving form one social position and its roles to another (Blinde and Greendorfer 1985; Greendorfer and Blinde 1985).

Explanations for withdrawal from coaching tend to fall into two camps. First are the sociological studies that emphasize shifts in personal relationships which affect the structural and personal motives for coaching. Weiss and Sisley (1984) investigated reasons for dropping out as a coach in youth basketball programs. Structural motives offered by former coaches to account for their withdrawal include: (1) role conflict--wanted to spend more time with the family, conflicts with the regular job, too time consuming, or other leisure activities are more interesting; (2) role shift in parenting--the son/daughter no longer is involved in the sport or program; (3) role strain--too many problems in dealing with unqualified officials, a lack of support from program personnel, disagreement with the program philosophy; (4) personal motives--no longer enjoying positive feelings like one used to when first coached.

Second are psychological studies in which college coaches claim a need to withdraw due to feelings of burnout. Caccesse and Mayerberg (1984) surveyed NCAA and AIAW coaches at division I and found that female head coaches more often expressed feelings of burnout than male coaches. Female dropouts tended to be slightly younger than males, and have fewer years of experience than males. Research also suggested that for those who remain in the coaching profession for a number of years, job satisfaction is good, and that those who feel stress due to role conflict, role strain, or shifts in attitudes tend to voluntarily withdraw.

Unfortunately, no studies appear to exist that provide statistics on the numbers of coaches fired in specific sports, or those who withdraw because they no longer can put up with the increased pressures in colleges and universities generated by expanding bureaucracy and greater emphasis on accountability. Similarly, research is needed to ascertain whether former coaches are better off financially as active or retired. One suspects that job turnover is probably not as high among intercollegiate head coaches in swimming as in football or basketball. Most of the turnover probably occurs among volunteers and assistant coaches. To verify these suspicions data are needed.

Summary

--Coaches belong to many organizations. They occupy roles that may exert cross-pressures on them with various duties to be performed. Such role conflict occurs as coach and spouse/parent. It also occurs as coach/professor. The magnitude of these conflicts depends on the demands created while individuals serve as volunteer, assistant, or head coach. As responsibilities increase in either role, or both, the cross-pressures on time and energy mount.

--Resolution of role conflict may lead the individual to "opt out" of one role in favor or another. It also may lead to a role shift. An alternative strategy is to become super-organized in order to adapt and accommodate to the pressure of both roles. Finally, one can withdraw from coaching and seek a new profession.

REVIEW QUESTIONS

1. What are the four types of role conflict? What is role strain?

2. In Chapter 8 role conflict is discussed for the parent/coach assuming that the individual is married. The focus was on interaction between spouses. Assume that the coach is a single parent and describe what kinds of conflicts might be found.

3. In Chapter 8 the split appointment of professor/coach is examined. Many people who coach, especially in high school, YMCAs, and U.S. Swimming programs, carry two jobs. Identify what kinds of role conflicts these people might have.

4. Which of the strategies for coping with role strain would you choose or have you chosen?

NOTES

1. From the coach's and athlete's perspectives, if the athlete wishes to place a higher priority on sports than on academics, then at least for the short-term, the academic path of least resistance is most rational. Conversely, if the athlete wishes to place a higher priority on academics, such a strategy obviously would not be followed.

2. As the emphasis on academic excellence increases, so do the public utterances of the litany that teaching is a full time "calling." A lesser commitment may be seen by some faculty as heretical.

TITLE PAGE
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PREFACE
CHAPTER 1 OVERVIEW AND KEY CONCEPTS
CHAPTER 2 THE ASSISTANT COACHES
CHAPTER 3 HIRING THE HEAD COACH
CHAPTER 4 THE HEAD COACH'S ORGANIZATIONAL AND COMMUNICATION ROLES
CHAPTER 5 THE PROBLEM OF CONTROL AND TURNOVER
CHAPTER 6 RECRUITING: STEPS AND STRATEGIES
CHAPTER 7 HEAD COACH AND KEY PEOPLE AND ORGANIZATIONS INSIDE THE SPORTS COMMUNITY
CHAPTER 8 SPECIAL PROBLEMS OF THE SPLIT APPOINTMENT
REFERENCES
Academic Resume