I just spent four solid hours head-of-departmenting, and my to-do list for tomorrow is still long as my arm. For tonight, too, actually. I haven’t even started on the teaching to-do list.

What heads of departments do? Well, today I’ve tried to understand the budget, I’ve had lots of people in my office, I’ve answered emails about issues ranging from booking a room at a time that suits other classes, accreditation for courses taken in Romania, contracts for MA students and a need for more shelves in the student labs, all the way through budgets and who’ll teach what next semester and preparing comments to a memo on how the administration might reorganise and ending up with basic discussions about the future of the discipline. The latter – the future, that is – has become rather an urgent question because the humanities faculty is reorganising in the next few months. Oh, I did twenty-five minutes of work for ELiNOR, as well (bills, getting the blog set up, email). Organising and preparing teaching comes in addition, of course, as does supervising MA students. And I’m supposed to be spending 50% of my time on research!

I’m paid to work a standard 37,5 hour week, that means 18 3/4 hours a week on research and 18 3/4 hours a week on teaching and administration. Of course there’s less teaching in summer, though advising and planning always needs to be done.

I’ve already started recording how much time I’m spending on what. I’m going to need to know when I ask the dean how to prioritise my time.

(Btw, I know lists of look-how-much-I-did-today are frightfully boring. Someone asked me, though, whether I would be blogging being head of deparment as I blogged getting my PhD, and so I thought I’d see what it would be like if I did. I’m not sure whether I’ll continue. There are a lot of things that can’t quite be blogged because noone quite knows yet and, well, you know. Stuff.)


Discover more from Jill Walker Rettberg

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

7 thoughts on “head of department, day 1

  1. torill

    Blogging being head of department would be a challenge. Research and teaching are both about production. Management is about cleaning house. “Today I sat in on three meetings, had a long conversation with a colleague about the facts of his work situation, and ended the day with yelling at the student administration office for asking me to do the same thing I have already done twice.” – It doesn’t invite originality. Actually, I have more original thoughts and ideas while cleaning house than while writing the 20th version of the bachelor study description.

    I have considered blogging the college reorganisation process, which is a very interesting, complex and productive process to take part in, but I will not. Basically because the process is so rife with controversy and our college so small that discussing it online could be considered breaking the trust of my colleagues.

    I give the same courtesy to the students, by not blogging the student democracy part of my job. While funny, descriptions of what goes on in some of the meetings could, after almost 14 years in this system, become so disillusioned it would border on harassment. Let’s just say one thing: Student study comittees are really weak on long-term (more than one semester) memory.

    Although now that I am writing this, I’d love to see how you deal with being head of the department at the University. I would have to blog the information education anonymously, because it would look like a bad, bitter sit-com. Think anybody would understand what college I was writing about if I did that?

  2. Gro

    I think you should let your head rest for the head of the
    department job and enjoy a thrilling quiz-evening once in a
    while. perhaps tomorrow?

  3. Eirik

    Oooph… Sorry about that question about accreditation for courses taken in Romania 😉 I’m sorry, but I think you’ll hear from me again about that, but maybe you understood that :o) Hihi… Good luck with everything, you’ll manage, I’m sure!

  4. martin lessard

    ‘blogging being head of department’ put more emphasis on LOG than WEB, I guess. That is, looking for trails, instead of insights. But I guess, depending on the trust network, it can be also a new way of being ‘head of department’: sharing, conversation, openness, distributed power and knowledge… But, for sure, as a ‘head’, some sort of ‘innocence’ is lost.

  5. Faltin

    Wow, so you actually became head of department. How cool! Congratulations! To protect your research time I think maybe it will be a good advice to stay completely away from work for shorter periods. I have had a 50/50 administration/research job for several years, and I often find it impossible to have any demanding research done without getting away from the everyday bustle. And a wireless week in a cottage can do marvels for your concentration… Good luck 🙂

  6. Anthony

    Looking forward to reading your “head of dept” blogging here!

  7. bicyclemark

    wanted to say congrads on your new position… i mean.. if congrads are in order…. I think they are.

Leave A Comment

Recommended Posts

Screenshot of a paragraph from a New York Times article published May 12, 2026. Text reads: "The price of tomatoes -tart bursts of flavor in salads and sandwiches — surged nearly 40 percent in April from a year ago on a combination of bad weather, high tariffs and climbing transportation costs."
AI STORIES

Genre glitches and unexpected promotional phrases as a sign of AI writing

A genre glitch is a characteristic of LLM-assisted writing where the text suddenly switches genre, typically inserting a short promotional phrase full of sensory details into an informational text. Genre glitches occur when a word in the generated text is heavily associated with a genre or context that is markedly […]

Top of a ransom note from Shinyhunters hacking group. Text reads: "SHINYHUNTERS rooting your systems since '19 ;) ShinyHunters has breached Instructure (again). Instead of contacting us to resolve it they ignored us and did some "security patches"."
Networked Politics University politics

UiB self-hosts the open source version of Canvas, so wasn’t affected by the breach

On May 1st Canvas announced a security breach, and then yesterday the system was hacked. The login page was replaced by a ransom note: if universities don’t pay up by 12 May, student data will be released. Here’s what the login page looked like yesterday: Way back in 2015, when […]

AI and algorithmic culture Networked Politics

AI-generated images, fascist aesthetics: Dieselbrølet and Heimatstrom

My German is pretty dodgy, so when I first saw Heimatstrom on Bluesky, shared by Roland Meyer, a professor of visual culture at Universität Zürich’s Digital Society Initiative, I misinterpreted it and thought it was a far-right campaign. But no, Heimatstrom is a group of left-wing environmentalists using fascist AI […]

Photo of a billboard ad at Oslo S train station showing a smiliing conductor and the text "Du må ikke sove. Joda, bare sov du."
AI STORIES

“Du må ikke sove”: a floating motif detached from its meaning (or: LLMs can write Norwegian but miss cultural references)

There’s a new ad for the train between Stavanger and Oslo in Norway that uses a line from Arnulf Øverland’s famous anti-fascist poem Du må ikke sove (“You must not sleep”). Du må ikke sove, you must not sleep, the ad says. And then it flips it, jovially, joda, bare […]

Academics in Norway: Sign this petition asking for research-based discussions of how to use AI in universities

I just signed a petition calling for Norwegian universities to use research expertise on AI when deciding how to implement it, rather than having decisions be made mostly administratively. ,  If you are a researcher in Norway, please read it and sign it if you agree – and share with anyone else who might be interested. The petition was written by three researchers at UiT: Maria Danielsen (a philosopher who completed her PhD in 2025 on AI and ethics, including discussions of art and working life), Knut Ørke (Norwegian as a second language), and Holger Pötzsch (a professor of media studies with many years of research on digital media, video games, disruption, and working life, among other topics).  This is not about preventing researchers from exploring AI methods in their research. It is about not uncritically accepting the hype that everyone must use AI everywhere without critical reflection. It is about not introducing Copilot as the default option in word processors, or training PhD candidates to believe they will fall behind if they do not use AI when writing articles, without proper academic discussion. Changes like these should be knowledge-based and discussed academically, not merely decided administratively, because they alter the epistemological foundations of research. Maria wrote to me a couple of months ago because she had read my opinion piece in Aftenposten in which I called for a strong brake on the use of language models in knowledge work. She was part of a committee tasked with developing UiT’s AI strategy and was concerned because there was so much hype and so few members of the committee with actual expertise in AI. I fully support the petition. There are probably some good uses for AI in research, but the uncritical, hype-driven insistence that we must simply adopt it everywhere is highly risky. There are many researchers in Norway with strong expertise in AI, language, ethics, working life, and culture. We must make use of this expertise. This is also partly about respect for research in the humanities, social sciences, psychology, and law. Introducing AI at universities and university colleges is not merely a technical issue, and perhaps not even primarily a technical one. It concerns much more: philosophy of science, methodological reflection, epistemology, writing, publishing, the working environment, and more. […]

screenshot of Grammarly - main text in the middle, names of experts on the left with reccomendations and on the right more info about the expert review feature
AI and algorithmic culture Teaching

Grammarly generated fake expert reviews “by” real scholars

Grammarly is a full on AI plagiarism machine now, generating text, citations (often irrelevant), “humanizing” the text to avoid AI checkers and so on. If you’re an author or scholar, they also have been impersonating and offering “feedback” in your name. Until yesterday, when they discontinued the Expert Review feature due to a class action lawsuit. Here are screenshots of how it worked.